BENGALURU: “Are you sleeping? How can people be safe in your hands then? In every government case we notice no sense of responsibility. It is shocking to see such a response from the well-trained IAS officers. Is the bureaucracy even functioning or not? The government has not yet spelt out its stand even after an order was passed by the Chief Justice in July 2016.”
A division bench of the High Court on Monday made these strong observations while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) in connection with the appointments at Bangalore University.
Justice H G Ramesh and Justice John Michael Cunha took the government and its bureaucracy to task as both failed to inform the court as to what steps had been taken in response to the directions issued by the division bench in July last year in relation to appointment of ‘ineligible’ candidates as syndicate members to the Bangalore University.
“This is nothing but height of irresponsibility. There is need to appoint bureaucrats with wisdom. Something is seriously wrong with this government and bureaucracy. This is a clear case of contempt,” the bench said before adjourning the matter to January 18.
The PIL was filed challenging the nomination of six syndicate members to Bangalore University in pursuant to the recommendation of MLC H M Revanna, known to be the right hand man of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.
The petitioner N K Ramesh, Principal of BTM First Grade College, had challenged the nomination of these members on the ground that none of the six members was eligible as they were not eminent educationists as prescribed under Section 28(1)(g) of the Karnataka Universities Act, 2000.
Notice to govt over appointment of SC/ST Commission Chairman
The High Court on Monday issued notice to the state government on a petition challenging the appointment of A Muniyappa as the Chairman of Karnataka State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
S B Suresh and others who have challenged Muniyappa’s appointment contended that the state had appointed him even though he was ineligible. They also contended that a person who occupies such a top post must have special knowledge to discharge powers and functions.