Site news


Picture of System Administrator
by System Administrator - Friday, 15 July 2016, 11:40 PM

By: M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bengaluru: I have received clarification from the UGC .UGC has replied to my RTI Question and provided the information..It confirms that UGC did not issue any guidelines in respect of any portraits to be put in Universities. Dr Shivakauar Deene brought 250 Dr Ambedkar portrait instead ofgetting printed Dr Ambedkar souvenir and distributing itas per VC Approval.I have asked CUK to provide me information under section 4(I) (a) (b) (c) (d) RTI Act What action is proposed against Dr Shivakauar Deenewho brought 250 Dr Ambedkar portrait instead ofgetting printedDr Ambedkar souvenir and distributing itas per VC Approval dated 19th April (CUK/SC-ST /F-1) and issuing a circular though he is not the registrar of University todisplay the250 Dr Ambedkar portrait instead of distributingDr Ambedkar souvenir to all in central University of Karnataka. Whose portrait should be put up in the CUK buildings as per CUK EC resolutions ? I want to know any CUK and MHRD and UGC rules or circulars regarding displaying the portraits of leaders at University or Universities every room and specifically, who are the persons whose portraits could be displayed? .Provide me this information within 48 hours as question of life and liberty of Dr Priya your Assistant professor is in question as one of your Group Demployee has filed complaint and FIR is booked with a fake circular issued by Dr Shivakumar Dene as he is not the registrar of the CUK.According to Citations ofKarnataka High Court Maqbool vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 February, 2013 " IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGADATED 18th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013BEFORETHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDYCRIMINAL APPEAL NO.734 OF 2008 it is held that "the portraits of Dr.Ambedkar and Buddha, did not by itself demonstrate that the portraits or flags were representative of the Scheduled Caste community. ------Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The judgment of the court below is set aside. The appellants are acquitted. The fine amount, if any, paid by the appellants shall be refunded.” And hence registering an FIR for atrocities in connection with a photo or portrait of Dr.Ambedkarby Norona Police Station is illegal and void and unwarranted and immediately need to be withdrawn as it is politically motivated by vested interests ."As no SC ST persons can feel insulted of their caste as Dr Priya act is simple as she demanded only an official circular to put the portrait and even otherwise "the portraits of Dr.Ambedkar and Buddha, did not by itself demonstrate that the portraits or flags were representative of the Scheduled Caste community”. So SC ST Cell cannot feel itself as insulted and cannot give compliant of any atrocities on portrait issue as it is not an SC ST issue or a castes issue .I have requestedappellate authority to issue orders to dismantle present "SC/ST Cell” which is illegal body headed by Dr Dene with superior advisory body acting more than the Universityand to re-constitute "SC/ST Cell” with five employees with including one coordinator and let it function as cell in the university (Not as Executive council of University ) which has no power to issue orders and circulars and remove forth with Dr Shivakumar Dene from the post ofcoordinator"SC/ST Cell” as per rules he cannot have dual roles to play .Let him work as Assistant professor in the department of management in CUK . UGC orders and constitution of "SC/ST Cell” and its functions and about "SC/ST Cell” is enclosed with my RTI appeal. I have further requested appellate authority to issue orders and circular to withdraw the FIR booked illegally based on illegal circular by an employee of University and set aside the circular issued by Dr Shivakumar Dene issued illegally as "SC/ST Cell” has no power to issue any circular and orders as per UGC orders.and provide justice and equity to Dr PriyaAssistant professor in cuk .

Few Legal experts feel removing unauthorized religious structures or removing unauthorized statues of public figures cannot attracts IPC section and in the similar way Removing unauthorized portrait cannot attracts IPC section and atrocity act. Indian parliament building has several hundred rooms but only one portrait of Dr Ambedkar is kept in central hall of parliament. Keep one portrait in one government building in its central hall and it is respectful and okay and in Tamil naudu Government Order passed on October 24, 1980 to display the portraits of the incumbent President, Prime Minister, Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Saint Thiruvalluvar, Arignar Anna, K. Kamaraj, C. Rajagopalachari, Thanthai Periyar, B.R. Ambedkar and U. Muthuramalinga Thevar in government offices. And Gujarat Government offices in the state are allowed to display portraits and photographs of only eight leaders, namely, Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, incumbent President and the Prime Minister, Mother (Goddess) India, Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyay and Shyama Prasad Mookherjee, the state government has said in reply to an RTI query, adding that some offices in districts are allowed to have pictures of local martyrs. Reportedly Gujarat Government hasnot-includedDr Baba Saheb Ambedkar's photos in the government list. Looking into above narration One portrait one office it is okay. But Central University of Karnataka has kept forcibly 250 Dr Ambedkar portrait among them 249 can be treated as unauthorized. VC and Registrar and Shikumar Dene is playing portrait politics and this is dangerous to unity and integrity of the nation. According to supreme court order unauthorized religious structures or removing unauthorizedstatues of public figures can be made and no IPC section attracts for such demolition in the similar way unauthorized Portrait removal of Dr Ambedkar cannot attract any section of IPC or atrocity act as removal of unauthorized Thing does not warrant any action by police. Kalburgi SP and Deputy commissionermusttreat these 249 Portrait as unauthorized one as these does not pass test of legal scrutiny feel few experts as they does not have support of UGC /MHRD circulars. Few legal experts feel that action of Dr Priya returning unauthorized Portrait with a request for authorization from university /UGC/MHRD in the University hung by unauthorized Persons do not attract IPC Sections or Atrocity sections and FIR slapped by police is illegal .Dr Priya is planning to approach Karnataka high court to get FIR quashed. ..In an order that will be welcomed by civic bodies and bring relief to citizens, the Supreme Court on recentlybanned fresh encroachment of roads, pavements and sideways by construction of religious structures or installation of statues of public figures. The apex court's ruling addresses a common hazard in all Indian cities and towns where unauthorized religious structures - often thinly disguised cases of land grab - have sprung up on public and private land and are obstructing roads and inconveniencing residents.The order can empower municipal and government bodies to prevent unauthorized constructions being carried out under the garb of religious structures as often local political interests and religious sentiments render authorities helpless .Gulbarga is a historic place which has a strong mystical undercurrent in the sense of being the origin of the social reformation movement of the great 12th century saint Basweshwara and also the seat of the great Sufi saint Khwaja Bande Nawaz..