Name Haj Bhawan after Abdul Kalam: BSY
Bengaluru, June 24: Former chief minister and Opposition Leader in the Legislative Assembly BS Yeddyurappa said that instead of naming the Hajj Bhavan after Tipu Sultan, let it be named after former president Dr APJ Abdul Kalam.
After releasing the Kannada version the four years achievement of the NDA government ‘Shuddha Nade- Sukta Vikas’ at the party office at Malleshwaram here on Sunday, Yeddyurappa said that if they wanted to change the name of Hajj Bhavan, it is better to name the Hajj Bhavan after former president late Dr APJ Abdul Kalam.
The party workers have brought out this book to educate the people on the achievements of the Modi government in the last four years. The UPA which ruled the country for ten years had seen more corruption and failed on all fronts. But in the NDA government, the economy of the country was safe and growing, defence system is strong and relationship with international community is also good, he claimed.
When NDA came to power, the BJP was in power in only six states. But now, the party is in power in 20 states. Without having guts to face Narendra Modi, all opposition parties came together. But the BJP would not budge for their unity. The pro-people programmes of the central government would definitely inspire the party in the state. So, the party workers have listed out the achievements of the central government and people would be educated about it, he said.
“HD Kumaraswamy had given lot of assurances before the election. So, 37 JDS MLAs were elected. He had promised of implementing all assurances within 24 hours of coming to power. But nothing has been done. I have asked my party workers to wait and watch. Moreover, we have been giving cooperation in terms of farmers issues. But the earlier government and the present government have taken wrong steps in the farmers issue”, he said.
Let DK Shivakumar disclose all the diaries he has. Who is obstructing him from doing it? He is making lame excuses just to cover-up his mistakes, he alleged.
When asked about BJ Puttaswamy’s outburst, Yeddyurappa said that he was telling that he would resign from the party because of his displeasure. He would speak to him, he said.
MLA Aravind Limbavali, MLC N Ravi Kumar, BJP assistant spokesperson AH Anand, Yuva Morcha general secretary Thammesh Gowda and others were present.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Karnataka Guv letter to govt, want to know how it got 'confidential material' from Lokayukta
Bengaluru (PTI): Another letter written by Karnataka Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot to the Chief Secretary, expressing "perplexity", as to how the government came to know about the "confidential material" relating to Lokayukta's request to him seeking prosecution or investigation sanction against some opposition leaders, surfaced on Friday.
In the letter to Chief Secretary Shalini Rajneesh, the Governor also pointed out that in the August 22 Cabinet decision there is only observation with regard to pendency in according sanction in four cases, and there was no "advice" to him, as reported in the media.
The Karnataka Cabinet has decided to give "aid and advice" to the Governor to act on requests seeking sanction for prosecution against JD(S) leader and Union Minister H D Kumaraswamy and three former BJP ministers including mining baron G Janardhan Reddy, the government had said on August 22.
"I have been made aware through media reports published on 23-08-2024 that the Cabinet had advised the Governor to accord sanction for investigation/prosecution proposal against H D Kumaraswamy, Murugesh Nirani, Janardhan Reddy, and Shashikala Jolle received from Lokayukta police without delay," the Governor said in a letter dated August 28.
"But, on thorough reading of the Cabinet decisions, it is further noted, that there is only observation with regard to pendency in according sanction in the above four cases along with dates of submission by Lokayukta Police to this Secretariat but there is no advice as such," he said.
Further noting that he is both "curious and perplexed" to note that how did the State Government and the Cabinet came to know about the request from Lokayukta Police along with dates of submission to the sanctioning authority and other details, the Governor asked, "how did Lokayukta Police being an independent body share confidential material with any person other than the sanctioning authority since I have seen in the media the confidential material floating around?"
"I am also curious to see the Cabinet note/materials regarding this subject based on which the Cabinet has observed and decided and which has been conveyed to me officially. Hence, I expect a prompt and early reply along with Cabinet note/supporting documents and the source of documents/ information in this regard," he added.
The August 22 Cabinet meeting and its decision that the Governor is referring to, was held within a week after him granting sanction for prosecution and investigation of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) site allotment case on August 16.
On August 19, Siddaramaiah moved the High Court challenging the legality of the Governor's order.
The High Court on September 12 completed its hearing on Siddaramaiah's petition challenging the legality of Governor Gehlot's approval for investigation against him in the MUDA site allotment case and reserved its orders.
In the MUDA site allotment case, it is alleged that compensatory sites were allotted to Siddaramaiah's wife B M Parvathi in an upmarket area in Mysuru, which had higher property value as compared to the location of her land which had been "acquired" by the MUDA.
The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvathi under a 50:50 ratio scheme in lieu of 3.16 acres of her land, where MUDA developed a residential layout.
Under the controversial scheme, MUDA allotted 50 per cent of developed land to the land losers in lieu of undeveloped land acquired from them for forming residential layouts. Some Opposition leaders and activists have also claimed that Parvathi had no legal title over this 3.16 acres of land.
