DOCSLIB.ORG

IN the COURT of VIII TH ACMM at BANGALORE CC No. 6711 of 2012 Complainant

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IN the COURT of VIII TH ACMM at BANGALORE CC No. 6711 of 2012 Complainant IN THE COURT OF VIII TH A.C.M.M AT BANGALORE C.C. No. 6711 of 2012 Complainant : State by Vidhana Soudha Police Vs. Applicant / Accused : Digvijay Mote APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGE UNDER SECTION 239 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE . The Applicant Digvijay Mote respectfully submits as follows : 1. That the Applicant accused submits that the complainant P.R.O. and Dy. Commissioner, Office of Lokayukta has filed a complaint on 29 th October 2011 against the applicant accused, the same case was investigated by the I.O. and the charge sheet is submitted before the court against the applicant accused with the surprising facts and Un-Scientific Evidences which are more fully described below . 2. Applicant is served with chargesheet u/s Sec. 341, 504 and 506 of IPC. The I.O of the case has submitted in the Charge Sheet submitted to this Court Pages 52 to 104 which are transcripts from Two websiteshttp://www.judgesplot4plot.com & www.indiancorruptjudges.com . The I.O has also submitted few pages from my youtube.com accounts where I have up-loaded Videos; directly or indirectly connected with contents of my websites and the affairs of “Karnataka Judicial Department Employees House Building Co-operative Society Limited, Karnataka High Court, Bangalore”. For brevity here after termed as “Karnataka Employees HBCS”. CDs also contain video clips of applicant’s live interview with Karnataka Lokayukta Justice Santosh Hegde in 2007; which was facilitated by complainant Syed Riaz. 3. Applicant is LEGALLY ILLITERATE and Literally P.U.C. pass. He has NO ADVOCATES’ Assistance. This Applicant accused is publisher of websites across globe through www.IndianCorruptJudges.com , www. Judges Plot4Plot.com , 1 www.Jail867CorruptJudges.wordpress.com , having his presence in social media under https://www.facebook.com/digvijay.mote , https://www.youtube.com/user/Digvijaymote , https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8D49820FAFEB9CB1 by www.IndianCorruptJudges.com ; and on Twitter with accounts viz., @India0corrupt @JailLokayuktas@IndiaCourts . 4. All these accounts are in presense on net for more than a five to ten years or more. The evidences admit the fact that website was hosted way back in 2002. The contents of these media was, is and shall be made known to all Constitutional Functionaries of India viz., President Of India, Prime Minister Of India, Chief Justice of India, Central Bureau of Investigation, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, Chief Minister of Karnataka, Karnataka Lokayukta, DG & IG of Police of Karnataka by emails, by CDs couriered , by social media inter-actions. Few of the acknowledgements as is in www.IndianCorruptJudges.com are pasted below, in box, as matter may be easy to refer-to:- “The CDs were couriered in 2003, intimating and alerting them to initiate action against the 867 Corrupt Judges involved in LOKAYUKTA HUSH- UP SCAM – to tll date to almost all Constitutional Authorities in India and Karnataka viz., His Excellancy The Hon’ble President of India Shri Abdul Kalam, Shri L.K.Advani , Shri P.C. Sharma, The Director, C.B.I., New Delhi etc., of which details from website http://indiancorruptjudges.com/ , of which CD is in custody of this Court from link in Index to Documents in Home-page @ 000.03 Acknowledgements of Constitutional Functionaries , having received Compact Disc i.e., CD; which the I.O., too has seized from Applicant’s Office upon court’s search and seizure warrant in 2012. Our Complaint against Lok Ayukta: Contents on the cover we have couriered. Hon’ble Lokayukta Justice 000.03.01 s N.Venkatachala, the Lokayukta and D.G.P. of Lokayukta Police Mr. A.R.Infant on 7 th July 2004 with latest up- dates; which was adduced as Evidence in this very Hon’ble Court of VIII ADDL C.M.M., B’LORE in C.C.NO: 2 8838/2005 on 22 nd August 2005 and on 2 nd September 2005, against Complaint Mr. D. Krishnappa, The Registrar, Karnataka Lokayukta. And Applicant’s family was acquitted. Acknowledgment of Lok Ayukta having received our complaint + CD dated 8 th July 2004; ; which was adduced as Evidence in this very Hon’ble Court of VIII ADDL 000.03.02 s C.M.M., B’LORE in C.C.NO: 8838/2005 on 22 nd August 2005 and on 2 nd September 2005, against Complaint Mr. D. Krishnappa, The Registrar, Karnataka Lokayukta. And Applicant’s family was acquitted. Acknowledgments of L.K. Advani + C.B.I.New Delhi 000.03.03 s +C.B.I.Bangalore in May 2003 Acknowledgments of Manohar Joshi + B.D.A. 000.03.04 s Commissioner Jaikar Jerome dated May 2013 Acknowledgments of N.D.A President Mrs. Sonia Gandhi 000.03.05 s + Hon’ble Chief Minister S. M. Krishna, in May 2003 Acknowledgments of DG & IG of Karnataka T.Madiyal + 000.03.06 s S. Mariswami , the Police Commissioner, in May 2003 Acknowledgments of Chief Justice of India V.N.Khare + 000.03.07 s President of India A.P.J.Kalam + N.K.Jain, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, in May 2003 C.M.of Karnataka through ‘Mr. Jawaid Akhtar, Additional Secretary to Chief Minister , dated 13 th August 2004 on 000.03.08 s our letter head “COMPLAINT AGAINST KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA Mr. N. Venkatachala” Chief Secretary to Karnataka Government Mr. K.K. Mishra, I.A.S., on 13 th August 2004 on our letter head 000.03.09 s “COMPLAINT AGAINST KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA Mr. N. Venkatachala” 3 Principal Secretary. Home Dept of Karnataka Govt. Shri Brahma Dutt., I.A.S., dated 13 th August 2004, on our 000.03.10 s letter head “COMPLAINT AGAINST KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA Mr. N. Venkatachala” Reply of Government da ted 14 th October 2004. Karnataka Home Department , Vidhana Soudha, Blore., stating that 000.03.11 s “Department of Personnel & Adminstrative Reforms, Vidhana Soudha is’ EXAMINING & Going to TAKE ACTION’ 000.03.12 s Postal Covers of Government Replies.Scan Copy 5. This Court has to initiate Criminal proceedings the Constitutional Authorities, by whose names the CDs were courierd . The inaction by this Court against said authorities and against 867 Corrupt Judges and Lokayuktas, shall crumble THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM of India and invites ANARCHY, which is impermissible under Indian Constitution and laws made there under. 6. Serious Crimes committed by 867 Corrupt Judges and Lokayuktas and punishable under Criminal Contempt of High Court, Sections of ‘various chapters of I.P.C’. Prevention of Corruption Act, Goonda Act, Criminal Procesure Code; is covered in Applicant’s websites www.judgesplot4plot.com & www .indiancorruptjudges.com are based on un-impeachable evidences gathered against 867 Corrupt Judges and Lokayuktas involved in LOKAYUKTA INSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION, which came to be hushed-up. The following amongst other investigations with criminal intent to ILLEGALLY protect the proven 867 Corrupt Judges and Lokayuktas is below:- [A] Upa Lokayukta G.P. Shivaprakash suo moto commenced investigations vide Complaint No. Compt//UpLok/BCD/64/1999 on 4/12/1999 against “SHIVALINGAIAH, PRESIDENT, KAR.STATE JUDL. DEPT.EMP.HOUSE BLGD.CO-OP.SOCIETY, BANGALORE” under 4 heading “IRREGULARITIES, NEPOTISM AND CORRUPT ACTIVITIES IN ALLOT MENT OF SITES”. [B] Up-Lokayukta wrote letter on 6th September, 1999 to B.D.A asking “whether JUDICIAL Layout is Approved by B.D.A and whether B.D.A has handed over Layout to C.M.C, Yelahanka”. As per our Investigations B.D.A replied to Up Lokayukta’s letter on 8th October, 1999 stating “ Neither B.D.A has approved JUDICIAL Layout Plan nor B.D.A has passed any Order to Hand-over JUDICIAL Layout to C.M.C, Yelahanka”. [C] After retirement of G.P. Shivaprakash, Justice N. Venkatachala was appointed as Karnataka Lokayukta. He instead of passing Orders as per Lokayukta Act or handing over Investigations to C.B.I chose to keep it pending like DEAD BODY in MORTUARY till in 2007; though G.P. Shivaprakash closed the case on 13th March, 2002 . It may kindly be noted that both G.P. Shivaprakash and Justice N. Venkatachala Karnataka Lokayukta were and are Allottees of sites in JUDICIAL Layout apart from all three present Lokayukta & two Upa Lokayuktas, per credible information [D] Upa Lokayukta was investigating inter alia whether Karnataka Employees HBCS which has secured more than few dozen Judgments from Karnataka High Court and Lower Courts till date to form three Layouts, more particularly JUDICIAL LAYOUT formed in 156 Acres or 193 Acres are bonafide or by Fraud. Few of prominent Judgments are ILR 1994 KAR 2115, ILR 1995 KAR 3139, etc. Up-Lokayukta G.P.Shivaparakash and Lokayukta came to know through Investigations with B.D.A and other Departments that Judgments were “Given and Taken by Fraud, Collusion, with Corrupt motives etc.” and that no any allottee has any Legal Title of Ownership to their respective sites, or on the lands on which sites are formed in the Light of B.D.A’s reply to Up- lokayukta. Simply put Judgments were given on Quid-Pro-Quo basis, for SKY-FALL of PROFITS, not wind-fall profits like COAL or MINE scam. [E] Websites Investigated contents are trying to bring to the kind perusal the True Facts to attention of Karnataka Government, Legislature, B.D.A, Karnataka High Court, Media, Transparency International, C.B.I, Karnataka Police, Advocates, whole world; so that TRUTH prevails in COURTS & GUILTY are PUNISHED. 5 [F] Applicant is XII standard passed. He was a successful businessman in Pest Control Services, having had my office in eleventh floor, High Point- IV, Hotel Chalukya Circle, Bangalore-1. He closed the business voluntarily to do national service. He was successful in getting Supreme Court Orders against Election Commission of India in 1993 to hold elections in all states, without denying “Right-To-Ballot & Timely-Vote; along with Citizens of Other States; in all States”.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Research Paper Impact Factor
    Research Paper IJBARR Impact Factor: 5.471 E- ISSN -2347-856X Peer Reviewed & Indexed Journal ISSN -2348-0653 OMBUDSMAN - A COMPARATIVE STUDY Katha Mathur Research Scholar, Manipal University, Jaipur, Dehmi Kalam, Rajasthan. Abstract Ombudsmanship is a concept of independent, easily accessible and soft control of public administration related to principle of democracy, rule of law and the good administration. The purpose of the present study is basically a legal comparison of different countries but more focus on some selected Indian cities and analyzing them. The focus of this study is to exhibit the appearances of Ombudsman institutions in different legal orders. Such study is necessary to find out the comparative status of legal working and acceptance denial of work environment. As we see, states and country are facing problems in making the concept a big success. The researcher has used a Doctrinal approach to this study by reading different articles, annual reports of states, research paper and books and would a comparative study. Based on the above, critical examination of ombudsman at many levels is done as a humble attempt to evolve and expand the role of it. As this study will highlight the importance and would suggest the awareness of Ombudsman. The Whole idea behind it is to come up with such points which can contribute a little in filling the ambiguity. This we know that there are some lacunas because of which we fail to achieve the success. So aptly studying on the topic would help to come with some good suggestions and conclusions. Introduction An ombudsman is an official person, usually appointed by the government or by the parliament but, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints of maladministration violation of rights.
    [Show full text]
  • THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 Sections
    THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Sections: 1. Short title and commencement. 2. Definitions. 3. Appointment of Lokayukta and Upalokayukta. 4. Lokayukta or Upalokayukta not to hold any other office. 5. Term of office and other conditions of service of Lokayukta and Upalokayukta. 6. Removal of Lokayukta or Upalokayukta. 7. Matters which may be investigated by the Lokayukta and an Upalokayukta. 8. Matters not subject to investigation. 9. Provisions relating to complaints and investigations. 10. Issue of search warrant, etc. 11. Evidence. 12. Reports of Lokayukta , etc. 13. Public servant to vacate office if directed by Lokayukta, etc. 14. Initiation of prosecution. 15. Staff of Lokayukta, etc. 16. Secrecy of information. 17. Intentional insult or interruption to or bringing into disrepute the Lokayukta or Upalokayukta. 17A. Power to punish for contempt. 18. Protection. 19. Conferment of additional functions on Upalokyukta. 20. Prosecution for false complaint. 21. Power to delegate. 22. Public servants to submit property statements. 23. Power to make rules. 24. Removal of doubts. 25. Removal of difficulties. 26. Repeal and savings. FIRST SCHEDULE SECOND SCHEDULE ***** STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS I Act 4 of 1985.- The administrative reforms commission had recommended the setting up of the institution of Lokayukta for the purpose of improving the standards of public administration, by looking into complaints against administrative actions, including cases of corruption, favouritism and official indiscipline in administration machinery. One of the election promises in the election manifesto of the Janatha Party was the setting up of the institution of the Lokayukta. The Bill provides for the appointment of a Lokayukta and one or more Upalokayuktas to investigate and report on allegations or grievances relating to the conduct of public servants.
    [Show full text]
  • Isec Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT 2005 – 2006 INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE Dr. V K R V Rao Avenue, Nagarabhavi, Bangalore – 560 072 Phone: 23215468, 23215519, 23215592 Fax: 91-080-23217008 E-mail: [email protected] CONTENTS ISEC in 2005-06: A Glance i–vi 1. ISEC Society 1 2. ISEC Faculty / Staff 2 3. Academic Centres 3 4. Research Activities Research Projects Completed 18 Project Reports under Final Revision 65 Research Projects in Progress 66 5. Academic Activities Seminars, Conferences, Workshops, Training Programmes and Refresher Courses Organised 70 Major Outreach Programmes 77 Seminars Presented by Visitors 78 Seminars Presented by Faculty 80 Students’ Biannual Seminar Series 81 Ph D Programme 82 Ph D Degrees Awarded 82 Academic Networks 83 6. Publications Books Published and Edited 84 ISEC Journal of Social and Economic Development 85 ISEC Monograph Series 85 ISEC Working Papers 85 Articles Published in Journals and Edited Books 87 7. Participation in Seminars Papers presented in Seminars, Conferences and Workshops 93 Participation in Seminars, Conferences and Workshops as Chairperson, Discussant and Rapporteur 102 Seminars, Workshops and Training Programmes Organised / Coordinated 106 Seminars, Conferences, Workshops and Meetings Attended 107 Keynote and Presidential Addresses Delivered 109 Lectures, Talks and Media 111 8. ISEC and Campus News in Brief Fellowships and Awards 116 Dr. V KRV Rao Awards 116 Welfare and Upkeep 117 Offices Held in Academic, Professional and Administrative Bodies 117 Miscellaneous 119 9. Meetings 121 10. Appointments, Retirements, Resignations etc. 122 11. Library 123 12. Data Bank 125 13. Acknowledgements 126 14. Financial Statements of Accounts 2005-06 ISEC in 2005-06: A Glance ISEC as It Stands Today This is the Annual Report of the Institute for the 33rd time.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Commission of Karnataka Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001
    1 As on 31.01.2018 Law Commission of Karnataka Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001 List of Files Registered as Research Files during 2009 Sl. Research File Subject Status/Position No. No. File is Closed by Re. Re-organization of Departments of Law, 1. LCK/R-01/2009 proceedings dtd. Parliamentary Affairs & Legislation 15/11/2011 a) Enactment on Euthanasia Petition from Report No.18 Smt. Karibasamma 2. LCK/R-02/2009 b) Repealing Sec. 309 of IPC – offence of Report No. 17 attempt to commit suicide Re. Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 – amendments suggested to Secs.44& 49 in the Report No.3 3. LCK/R-03/2009 Judgments of High Court of Karnataka in 1996 (7) Kar.L.J 215 & W.P. No.624/1996. Representation from the Lawyers of Hubli- 4. LCK/R-04/2009 Pending “Rules of Recruitment of Judicial Officers” Re: Indian Penal Code – Proposal to amend Report No.11 5. LCK/R-05/2009 Section 498-A Re: Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 – proposal to withdrawn Notification No.HD 24 6. LCK/R-06/2009 Report No.2 PCR 79 date 31.8.1979 issued under Section 10 of the 7. LCK/R-07/2009 Human Organs Transplantation Act, 1994 Report No.31 Re: Duty of State to make law known to the 8. LCK/R-08/2009 Public before it is brought into force and to Report No.25 furnish copies of any law at any time. Re : Ensuring Accountability about disposal File is closed by 9. LCK/R-09/2009 of cases which are required to be disposed off proceeding dated within the statutory limit 23/12/2010 Re: Measures to ensure accountability of the State for brining the new law into force 10.
    [Show full text]
  • The Path to Gram Swaraj in Karnataka
    THE PATH TO GRAM SWARAJ IN KARNATAKA REPORT OF THE KARNATAKA PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT AMENDMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 2014 DEDICATED TO THE PIONEERS Shri Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi Dr. Babasaheb Ambedker Shri Rajiv Gandhi Shri B D Jatti P. V. Narashima Rao Shri Ramakrishna Hegde Shri Abdul Nazeer Sab Shri Veerappa Moily Shri M Y Ghorpade OUR GRATITUDE TO Shri Siddaramaiah Shri H. K. Patil Chief Minister of Karnataka Minister for Rural Development and Panchayat Raj CHAIRPERSON KANADAM RAMAIAH RAMESH KUMAR, a Member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly and former Speaker was born in Srinivasapura Taluk, Kolar District. Influenced by Karl Marx as a young boy, he has practised a ‘left’ ideology and relentlessly served his constituency for more than 35 years. Born into an agricultural family he still farms for a living, and is a linguist, nature lover and connoisseur of music. A strong critic of the failures in our system, he supports his stands with threadbare analysis. He believes in the capacity of people to take their own decisions, respects and honours their right to self governance and is a staunch believer in complete devolution and Panchayat Raj. CORE COMMITTEE CHAIR C. NARAYANASWAMY , a former MP from Bangalore North, born in an agricultural family, is an authority on rural development, Panchayat Raj and decentralization. He has worked with Shri Mani Shankar Aiyer and Prime Minister Shri Rajiv Gandhi. He has been synonymous with the evolution of Panchayat Raj in Karnataka. A lawyer by profession, he has represented the cause of farmers and served Karnataka in several political and administrative positions.
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru
    1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 17 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.51684 OF 2019 (GM-RES)PIL BETWEEN: SAMAJ PARIVARTHANA SAMUDAYA (A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960), REPRESENTED BY ITS FOUNDER PRESIDENT, SRI S.R. HIREMATH, OFFICE AT “ASHADEEP”, JAYANAGAR CROSS, SAPTAPUR, DHARWAD-580 001. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI BASAVARAJU S., ADVOCATE AND SRI GOUTHAM A.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 2 2. DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF PERSONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (VIGILANCE), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. SECRETARIAT TO THE GOVERNOR OF KARNATAKA RAJ BHAVAN, RAJ BHAVAN ROAD, BENGALURU. 4. SHRI BHIMANAGOUDA SANGANAGOUDA PATIL JUDGE (RTD), HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, UPA-LOKAYUKTA, MULTI-STOREYED BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRABHULING K. NAVADGI, ADV. GENERAL A/W SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP FOR R1, R2 AND R3; SRI ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI JOSEPH ANTHONY, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARING THAT THE RESPONDENT NO.4 HAS NO AUTHORITY TO HOLD AND CONTINUE TO HOLD THE PUBLIC OFFICE OF THE KARNATAKA UPA-LOKAYUKTA, UNDER THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984; QUASHING THE ORDER BEARING NO.DPAR 168 SLU 2017 DATED 20.11.2019 PASSED BY THE GOVERNOR OF KARNATAKA, APPOINTING 4 TH RESPONDENT AS .
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Reports [2013] 1 S.C.R
    [2013] 1 S.C.R. 1 2 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 1 S.C.R. STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. A A recommending only one name, instead of a panel of names, v. is in consonance with the law laid down by Supreme Court, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. A. MEHTA (RETD) & ORS. and there is no cogent reason not to give effect to the said (Civil Appeal Nos. 8814-8815 of 2012) recommendation. JANUARY 2, 2013 s.3 – Delay in appointment of Lokayukta – Held: B B [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND FAKKIR MOHAMED Statutory provisions make it mandatory on the part of the State IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, JJ.] to ensure that the office of Lokayukta is filled up without any delay. Gujarat Lokayukta Act, 1986: Constitution of India, 1950: C C s.3 – Appointment of Lokayukta – ‘Consultation’ – Arts. 163 and 166 – Manner in which Governor acts – Connotation of – Primacy of opinion of Chief Justice of State Explained – Held: Where Governor acts as the Head of the – Held: Section 3 must be construed in the light of meaning State, except in relation to areas which are earmarked under given by courts to the word ‘consultation’ so as to give effect the Constitution as giving discretion to the Governor, the to the provisions of the statute to make it operative and D D exercise of power by him, must only be upon the aid and workable – Statutory construction of provisions of the Act itself advice of the Council of Ministers – Therefore, appointment mandates primacy of opinion of the Chief Justice – In a of Lokayukta can be made by the Governor, as Head of the situation where one of the consultees has primacy of opinion State, only with aid and advice of Council of Ministers, and under the statute, either specifically contained in a statutory not independently as a Statutory Authority provision, or by way of implication, consultation may mean concurrence – Interpretation of statutes – Purposive E E Administrative Law: construction.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing Political Scenario in Karnataka
    www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 8 August 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882 Changing Political Scenario in Karnataka D.Menaka Thammaiah Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Government First Grade College, H.S.R.Layout, Sector 1, 24th Main, 14th A Cross Bangalore- 560102. .Politics in Karnataka - Post-Independence to 1983 This phase is marked by Congress dominance and rule of two dominant castes i.e. Vokkaligas and Lingayats. Before state reorganization in 1956, most of the rural Mysore was dominated by Vokkaligas and had prominence in government. With the enlargement of the state in 1956 to include the Lingayat dominant districts of Bombay Karnataka, Lingayats gained ascendancy in the politics. (Manor,1977 pp1865,1867) The dominance of these two communities continued till 1969, when the Congress party at the national level underwent a transformation. In 1969, there was a split in Congress. The ruling elite in Karnataka which was in the opposite group of the Congress, referred to as the Syndicate, later known as Congress (O) found it difficult to continue in office. The Congress(R) emerged victorious in 1972 Assembly election. (Rajashekaraiah, 1987, pp 583-584) The trend of major caste domination in the state politics was broken, when Sri Devaraj Urs from a minority community and loyalist to Mrs. Indira Gandhi was chosen as the Chief minister of the state on 23rd March, 1972. Devaraj Urs was considered as the champion of the Backward classes in the state. He had many from backward classes, minorities and SCs / STs as ministers in his cabinet and council of ministers.
    [Show full text]
  • GOVERNMENT of KARNATAKA Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs KARNATAKA ACT No. 4 of 1985 the KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT
    GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs KARNATAKA ACT No. 4 OF 1985 THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 AND THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA RULES, 1985 1988 GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs K\RNATAKA ACT No. 4 OF 1985 THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 (As amended upto 1-10-1986) AND THE KaRNATAKA LOKAYUKTA RULES, 1985 fAs amended upto 15-10-1987) NIEPA-DC D5844 I98S OUb. iVuMi '.r l byj.tesus U luv, National fn;:-tiTuce of Education*! Planmn. : Aministration 17-B.SnA< .:clo MM<2,N.i-* r)o!hi-110ni# DOC.No..D.-S.8fM- ............... ' ......... Page 1. The Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 1 (wi'h Corrigenda and Notification) 2. The Karnataka Lokayukta Rules, 1985 35 3. The Karnataka Lokayukta (Amendment) Rules, 19S8 45 TJHE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 KARNATAKA ACT No. 4 OF 1985 THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 Arrangement of Sections Sections : 1 • Short title and commencement 2. Definitions 3. Appointment of Lokayukta and Upa-lokayukta 4. lokayukta or Upalokayukta not to hold any ether office 5. Term of office and other conditions of service of Lokayukta and Upalokayukta 6. Removal of Lokayukta or Upalokayukta 7. Matters which may be investigated by the lokayukta and an Upalokayukta 8. Matters not subject to investigation 9. Provisions relating to complaints and investigations 10. Issue of search warrant, etc. 11. Evidence 12. Reports of Lokayukta, etc, 13- Pablic servant to vacate office if directed b/ Lokayukta, etc. 14. Iritiation of prosecution 15. Staff of Lokayukta, etc. 16. Secrecy of information 17. Intentional insult or interruption to or bringing into disrepute the Lokayukta or Upalokayukta (») 18.
    [Show full text]
  • Husstitlepage.Pdf
    promoting access to White Rose research papers Universities of Leeds, Sheffield and York http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ This is an author produced version of a paper published in Health Policy & Planning. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/42731/ Published paper Huss, R, Green, A, Sudarshan, H, Karpagam, S, Ramani, K, Tomson, G and Gerein, N (2010) Good governance and corruption in the health sector: lessons from the Karnataka experience. Health Policy & Planning White Rose Research Online [email protected] Title Good governance and corruption in the health sector – Lessons from the Karnataka experience Authors: Huss R (4), Green A (4), Sudarshan H (2), Karpagam SS (2), Ramani KV (3), Tomson G (1), Gerein N (4) Partner Institutions: (1) Karolinska Institutet, Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of International Health (IHCAR) and Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics (LIME), Medical Management Centre (MMC)., Stockholm, Sweden. (2) Karuna Trust, Karnataka State, Bangalore, India. (3) Indian Institute of Management, Centre for Management of Health Services, Ahmedabad, India. (4) University of Leeds, Nuffield Centre for International Health and Development, Leeds, UK. 1 Authors’ contribution and conflict of interest statements I, R Huss, declare that I as coordinator of the evaluation participated in the design, data collection and analysis and the drafting and creation of the final manuscript. I had full access to all the data which was used in this article and I have the final responsibility to submit this article for publication in Health Policy and Planning. I have no conflict of interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Karnataka Administrative Reforms Commission
    KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS COMMISSION INTERIM REPORT COMPLIMENTS | FOR REFERENCE ONLY | LATHA KRISHNA RAO, IAS SECRETARY K.A.R.C Karnataka Administrative Reforms Commission Interim Report January 2001 NUEPA DC D14412 CHAIRMAN HARANAHALLI RAMASWAMY MEMBERS S.B.MUDDAPPA Former Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka. BLASIUS.M.D’SOUZA Former Law Minister, Government of Karnataka. SECRETARY G. LATHA KRISHNA RAO, IAS © Copyright 2001 Karnataka Administrative Reforms Commission Government of Karnataka No.9, 3ri1 Floor, S"1 Stage, M.S. Building, Ambedkar Veedhi, Bangalore-560 001. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means without the prior permission of the Government of Karnataka Design and layout : Akshara Advertising, Bangalore. Extract of Budget speech of Hon’ble Chief Minister Sri S.M.Krishna on 27/03/2000 “I am determined to usher in a new work culture in all government departments. I would like the government to be more polite to people, clear the files faster and deliver better service. I am also aware of the complex rules and regulations under which the government functions. A typical file in Vidhana Soudha may have to be seen by 15 to 25 levels for the final decision to reach the citizen. The government will set up an Administrative Reforms Commission to recommend steps to offer better service to Karnataka citizens.” Extract of speech of Hon’ble Chief Minister at the time of Inauguration of Administrative Reforms Commission on 08/05/2000 “Thero is a dire need for effecting fundamental and thorough changes to the present system of administration, w hich has becom e obsolete, and our government will use the tools of modern technology at all levels of administration in the process of change.” “The modern technological tools like Information technology, video conferencing and data collection were not available about a decade ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Masters Thesis Rakesh Narayana.Pdf (10.56Mb)
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``;;;C5*FC+,`+,('9(/:$$ i !"#$%&%'()*+ ! "#!$%&'()!*+,%-!.%-%/%0%#!1'23%-'!4)%4!4)5(!4)'(5(!5(!%!-'(+34!67!,/!-'('%-2)!508'(459%4560(!%01! 7501509(:!;6+-2'(!67!5076-,%4560!64)'-!4)%0!,/!6<0!)%8'!=''0!%2&06<3'19'1!%01!%!-'7'-'02'! 35(4!)%(!=''0!%>>'01'1:!?)5(!<6-&!)%(!064!=''0!>-'856+(3/!(+=,544'1!46!%0/!64)'-!+058'-(54/!76-! %<%-1!67!%0/!4/>'!67!%2%1',52!1'9-'':! ! ! !"#$%&'()************++! ,%&)**+************++! ii Acknowledgements I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the people who have been extremely helpful to me during the process of research and writing this thesis.
    [Show full text]