Special cabinet meeting on caste census in Karnataka ends without any major decision
Bengaluru, Apr 17 (PTI): Amid internal differences over the Social and Educational Survey report, popularly known as 'caste census', a special meeting of Karnataka cabinet that was convened on Thursday to discuss it, ended inconclusive, without any major decision.
However, denying any internal rifts, ministers who attended the meeting said they discussed the parameters used for the survey, and sought for more information and technical details from senior officials.
The cabinet will once again discuss the survey report on May 2 and decide on it.
"The cabinet has discussed the report in detail and it was felt that more information and technical details were required for discussion. So, senior officials have been asked to provide it. The discussion today was incomplete," Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said.
Briefing reporters, he said that the discussions happened in a cordial atmosphere, and several matters like population, backwardness, the parameters that were used during the social and educational survey, the economic parameters that were considered, were all discussed to an extent.
As discussions were incomplete, it will be discussed once again. "As the next cabinet meeting will be held in MM Hills in Chamarajanagar district with focus on developmental issues of the region, it has been decided to discuss this matter once again in the cabinet that will be held on May 2, and make a final decision," he added.
According to sources, some ministers expressed reservations about the survey report, citing concerns expressed from several quarters calling it unscientific and outdated, and about undercounting. Following this, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah asked all ministers to give their opinion in writing or verbally.
Soon after the meeting ended, Transport Minister Ramalinga Reddy, speaking to reporters, said that the chief minister had asked ministers to give their opinion before the next cabinet meeting.
Though there were reports that a couple of ministers spoke in an "upset tone" during the discussion on the survey report, expressing their reservation about it, this was not confirmed by other ministers present in the cabinet meeting. They maintained that the meeting was held in a cordial atmosphere.
Various communities, especially Karnataka's two dominant ones -- Vokkaligas and Veershaiva-Lingayats -- have expressed strong reservations about the survey that has been done, calling it "unscientific", and have demanded that it be rejected, and a fresh survey be conducted.
Objections have also been raised by various sections of society, and there are also strong voices against it from within the ruling Congress.
However, not everyone is opposed. Leaders and organisations representing Dalits and some sections of OBCs, among others, are in support of it, and want the government to make the survey report public and proceed with it, stating the government has spent about Rs 160 crore public money on it.
With strong disapproval from the two politically influential communities, the survey report may turn out to be a political hot potato for the government, as it may set the stage for a confrontation, with Dalits and some sections of OBCs, among others demanding for it to be made public and implemented.
Responding to a question, was there any discussion regarding pros and cons of the survey report at the cabinet, Patil said, "nothing like that....Parameters used for the survey like the person's source of income, whether he or she is owning cattles -- such things came up for discussion. Some senior ministers gave their guidance on certain matters and sought for some details."
"Details will be provided by officials. It will be discussed in the next cabinet and decided," he said.
To a question whether there was discussion on the contentious issues of population strength of various communities, the Law Minister said the misinterpretations that are going on regarding the population are not completely true and it has already been clarified. "94.17 per cent of the population was surveyed."
Asked if anyone disputed about the Vokkaliga and Veerashaiva-Lingayat population mentioned in the survey, he said that matter did not come up for discussion today.
Findings of the survey is said to be contrary to the "traditional perception" with regard to the numerical strength of various castes, especially the dominant Veerashaiva-Lingayats and Vokkaligas, making it a politically sticky issue.
According to sources, ministers from these two communities have placed their objections in this regard, during the cabinet meeting.
Both Veershaiva-Lingayats and Vokkaligas, and also few other communities have alleged that their various sub castes have been divided among different categories of OBC, resulting in decrease in their respective population numbers. They have alleged that many households were left out from the survey or undercounting.
After a long wait, the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes' report was placed before the cabinet for the first time on April 11.
The Siddaramaiah-led Congress government (2013-2018) had in 2015 commissioned the survey in the state.
The State Backward Classes Commission, under its then chairperson H Kantharaju, was tasked with preparing a caste census report. The survey work was completed in 2018 towards the end of Siddaramaiah's first tenure as Chief Minister, and the report was finalised by his successor K Jayaprakash Hegde in February 2024.
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.
HC says no coercive action against Sonu Nigam over Kannada song row, allows video appearance
Bengaluru, May 15 (PTI): The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday directed that no coercive steps be taken against singer Sonu Nigam until the next date of hearing, in connection with a recent criminal case registered against him for allegedly making offensive remarks during a concert.The court also permitted the singer to appear via video conferencing for recording his statement, if required by the investigating officer (IO). Alternatively, if the IO insists on a physical appearance, the court said the officer could visit Nigam, with the singer bearing the associated expenses.
The case stems from a complaint lodged after an incident at a concert, where some Kannadiga fans had requested Nigam to sing in Kannada. The singer allegedly took offence to the tone of the request and reportedly remarked, “This is why Pahalgam happened,” drawing a controversial comparison to the April 22 terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir.
During the hearing, Nigam’s counsel, Dhananjay Vidyapati, argued that the complaint was filed solely for publicity and that the alleged offence of public mischief under Section 505 of the IPC was not made out.
He also said it was a solitary incident, the concert proceeded smoothly, and the complaint was filed by a third party.
The state counsel, however, maintained that Nigam’s remarks needed to be examined in the course of investigation to determine intent.
“Whether the comments were intentional or not cannot be adjudicated under Section 482 (CrPC). He has not cooperated with the investigation. He could have at least said he was busy,” the State submitted.
Arguing against special privileges, the State’s counsel added, “A person who does not respect due process of law cannot be given benefit under 482… He is not a normal man, but that is precisely why he should not have made such a statement.”
When the court asked why Nigam’s statement could not be recorded virtually or even at his residence, the State objected, saying that would amount to giving the singer “too much convenience.”
Responding to concerns raised by Nigam’s counsel about the media spectacle that would follow a physical appearance, the court observed: “If you want physical appearance, you go to his place and record his statement. He could bear the expenses.”
The court recorded the State’s submission that no coercive steps would be taken if Nigam cooperated with the investigation. It stayed the filing of any final report in the case until the next date of hearing.
