For now, Greater Bengaluru unlikely to go beyond BBMP limits
: The govt is all set to put on hold the move to expand Bengaluru's civic area to 1,000-plus sqkm by including peripheral villages within the jurisdiction of the proposed
Greater Bengaluru Authority
(GBA). Instead, it will retain the current extent of 709 sqkm.
The state cabinet, which will meet Friday, is expected to discuss the matter with a decision on the date of implementation of Greater
Bengaluru Governance Act-2024
, which was notified on April 24. Following the passing of the new legislation, delineation of GBA's boundaries had come up for discussion, with many villages on the outskirts of the city expressing interest in getting detached from gram panchayats and being included within the city civic body's jurisdiction.
The
BBMP
Restructuring Committee, in its first interim report, had suggested the GBA area cover 1,307 sqkm (including BBMP and BDA areas). The committee led by MLA Rizwan Arshad, which submitted the latest report on restructuring Bengaluru city administration, spoke about creating new corporations to govern while not specifying the proposed extent of the city's civic area.
Following this, several legislators in the city and Bengaluru Rural district submitted suggestions seeking the inclusion of some villages into Bengaluru. That had a ripple effect on the realty sector with land prices shooting up in villages on the city's periphery in anticipation of becoming an integral part of Bengaluru's civic administrative system. However, the proposed inclusion and expansion of GBA area will not happen immediately.
A source said: "Initially, the existing BBMP limits will be considered as the jurisdiction of Greater Bengaluru. In future, decisions will be made regarding the inclusion of gram panchayats and towns on the city's outskirts." Although there were proposals to create three city corporations for more efficient governance, the final decision rests with the govt.
The govt notified Greater Bengaluru Governance Act-2024 on April 24, which outlines a three-tier civic governance system consisting of Greater Bengaluru Authority, city corporations and ward committees. The Act allows for the formation of up to seven city corporations.
In fact, the opposition BJP had criticised the govt's move to form Greater Bengaluru, calling it a strategy to centralise power and influence the upcoming civic body elections. For over four-and-a-half years, BBMP has been functioning without an elected body, and while the Congress govt promised that the city will be governed by an elected body once Greater Bengaluru comes into existence, the timeline for this remains unclear.
On holding elections for newly formed Greater Bengaluru, the source said, "There are proposals to trifurcate BBMP limits into three civic corporations. Once formed, elections to the new local bodies are likely to happen by the year-end. Prior to deciding on the elections, there are many modalities that need to be completed which include jurisdiction of the wards, reservation and others."
On other hand, BJP has already explored legal options to hold civic elections as per the BBMP Act by approaching the court and plans to challenge GBA's formation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
14 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Every SC/ST complaint must lead to registration of FIR without any preliminary inquiry, orders Madras High Court
In a significant verdict, the Madras High Court has held the police cannot conduct preliminary inquiry on receipt of complaints disclosing cognisable offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989 and that the law enforcing agency should straightaway register First Information Reports (FIRs) against the suspects. Justice P. Velmiurugan highlighted that Section 18A(1)(a), introduced by way of an amendment in 2018, of the Act categorically states that no preliminary inquiry would be required for registration of FIR against any person. 'The legislative intent is to ensure immediate and unfiltered registration of complaints alleging caste based atrocities, without procedural obstructions or administrative discretion,' he said. The judge agreed with advocate R. Thirumoorthy that the police often do not follow the legal mandate. Therefore, he directed the Director General of Police/Head of Police Force (DGP/HoPF) to communicate a copy of his order to all Commissioners as well as Superintendents of Police in the State in order to avoid infraction of the legal requirement as far as SC/ST cases were concerned. The judge said, in several cases, he had been coming across instances of preliminary inquiries being conducted in SC/ST cases and such inquiries being conducted by officers below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) though Rule 7(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, mandates investigation in SC/ST cases to be conducted by police officers not below the rank of DSP. Stating procedural lapses should not recur in the future, the judge made it clear investigation in SC/ST cases must be completed and final reports/charge sheets must be filed before the special courts within 60 days, from the date of registration of FIR, as mandated under Rule 7(2) of the 1994 Rules. He insisted upon time bound filing of final reports in all cases booked under the SC/ST Act. Justice Velmurugan also ordered that judicial magistrates could not take cognisance of private complaints seeking a direction to the police to register FIRs under the SC/ST Act and that such complaints must be forwarded to the special courts constituted under Section 14 of the Act. He pointed out that the judicial magistrates lacked the jurisdiction to take cognisance of such private complaints. The orders were passed on a petition filed by Muniraj, a disabled person belonging to a Scheduled Caste. He had filed a private complaint before a judicial magistrate in Krishnagiri district and obtained a direction to the Hosur Town police in August 2024 to inquire into his complaint against a few individuals who were reportedly attempting to usurp his immovable property and had also abused him using caste slurs. He had approached the High Court accusing the Hosur Town Police Station Inspector of not having inquired into his complaint properly despite a judicial direction. However, after holding that the direction issued by the judicial magistrate was not valid in the eye of law, Justice Velmurugan directed the Krishnagiri Superintendent of Police to ensure that a FIR was registered based on the petitioner's complaint. The judge also said, the Superintendent of Police could conduct the investigation either by himself or entrust it to an officer not below the rank of DSP who, in turn, must file a final report within 60 days.
The Hindu
14 minutes ago
- The Hindu
DNA Networks moves Karnataka HC against report of Commission of Inquiry on stampede
DNA Entertainment Networks Pvt. Ltd., an event management company, on Thursday moved the High Court of Karnataka challenging the report submitted by the one-man Commission of Inquiry on the incident of stampede outside M. Chinnaswamy stadium in Bengaluru during the victory celebrations of Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) team on June 4. John Michael Cunha, a retired judge of the High Court of Karnataka, had conducted the inquiry under the provisions of the Commissions of Inquiry (CoI) Act, 1952, on the terms and reference notified by the State government, and submitted the report to the government on July 11. 'Biased manner' 'The commission seems to have proceeded in a biased manner as if it is a fault-finding commission rather than a fact-finding commission, and thus report is vitiated,' it has been alleged in the petition while pointing out that a copy of the report was not given to the petitioner even though it was leaked to the media. Finding several flaws in the 'hastily' conducted inquiry proceedings, the DNA has alleged that the entire inquiry process would be violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the CoI Act, 1952, as no opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses was given to it. '...the haste with which the respondents conducted the inquiry gives the impression that the government wanted to save its skin and that the Commission of Inquiry was a mere eyewash in order to pacify the general public and to deflect the blame from itself by making innocent persons such as the petitioner and its officials a scapegoat,' it has been alleged in the petition. DNA, which participated in the inquiry proceedings before the commission, has also contended that it was not given a copy of the depositions of its witnesses and the other witnesses as well as the documents marked in spite of the making written request in this regard. It has also been claimed in the petition that the commission failed to give a personal hearing as per the provisions of the Act before making any adverse remarks that could prejudicially affect reputation of any person, despite the request in this regard made by the representative of the DNA.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
44 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Three-member Parliament panel likely to probe charges against Justice Varma
A three-member inquiry committee is expected to be formed soon to examine allegations against Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma, following the submission of a motion in both Houses of Parliament earlier this week, news agency PTI reported on Thursday, citing sources. The motion—signed by 152 Members of Parliament (MPs) and submitted to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on July 21, the opening day of the Monsoon session—has triggered consultations among senior leaders across both Houses, the report added. The Rajya Sabha also received a similar notice on the same day, signed by 63 opposition MPs. The report stated that the speaker Birla is likely to write to the Chief Justice of India to seek nominations for two members of the panel: one from the Supreme Court and one high court chief justice. The Speaker will also appoint a distinguished jurist of his choice to complete the three-member committee. Former Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar had referred to the Judges (Inquiry) Act during Rajya Sabha proceedings on Monday, highlighting that when motions are submitted simultaneously in both Houses, a joint process must be followed, PTI reported. Background The controversy began after bundles of burnt and partially burnt cash were found at Justice Yashwant Varma's official residence earlier this year. Following this, an in-house committee of judges was set-up to probe the matter. It submitted a report recommending the impeachment of Justice Varma. Justice Varma, however, has now moved the Supreme Court seeking to quash the report. On July 23, the apex court said it would constitute a bench to hear his plea.
