The Karnataka High Court on Monday directed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to furnish the details about the Non-Banking Finance Companies (NBFCs) in the State.
A Division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice K. Sreedhar Rao and Justice B.V. Nagarathna also asked the RBI to give details like the secured/unsecured loans advanced by these NBFCs and the purpose for which it was given, and such other details.
The Bench issued the direction while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by M.D. Suresh Babu. He said in his plea that NBFCs like Muthoot and Manappuram finance companies charge exorbitant rate of interest violating the Prevention of Money Laundering (KML) Act.
Quota list
The High Court ordered issue of notice to the Chief Secretary on a contempt of court petition filed by the State Election Commission (SEC) complaining that the government had failed to publish reservation for the wards in 209 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) as directed by the court earlier.
As per an undertaking given by the government to the court, the reservation list should have been published by December 17. However, without publishing the list before the deadline, the government sought two more weeks but this plea was rejected by the High Court and the government was directed to publish the list by December 21.
Despite this directive, the government did not publish the list but has pleaded the High Court to stay its directions for publication of reservation list for enabling it to appeal in the Supreme Court. The government has already filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court in the absence of a stay order by the High Court.
Stay extended
Justice H. Billappa of the High Court extended the stay on Special Lokayukta Court’s October 25, 2012 order to the Lokayukta police to investigate into the alleged irregularities in the implementation of the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMIC).
Contempt notice
The High Court ordered issue of notice to Chief Secretary S.V. Ranganath and Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL) Managing Director N. Sivasailam on a contempt of the court petition. The plea said that they had failed to ensure that the Dr. B.R. Ambedkar statue was shifted from its place in front of the Vidhana Soudha in a fortnight as per the direction of the court.
A Division Bench comprising Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar and Justice B. Manohar passed the order on a petition filed by Bangalore-based advocate A.V. Amaranathan. It was on his public interest litigation petition that the court on December 12, 2012 had directed the government to temporarily shift the statue to enable smooth and speedy work on Namma metro in front of the Vidhana Soudha.
Meanwhile, another Division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice K. Sreedhar Rao and Justice B.V. Nagarathna asked the BMRCL to respond by January 8 to the State government’s plea that sought two months to shift the statue as experts’ opinion had to be got on the technicality of shifting the statue so that it is not damaged in the process.
‘G’ category sites
The High Court directed the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to forthwith submit applications filed by allottees of ‘G’ category sites before the three-member committee headed by retired judge of the High Court B. Padmaraj. The panel was constituted by the court to scrutinise allotments made to certain persons under ‘G’category.
The Division Bench headed by Justice Shylendra Kumar passed the order while hearing a contempt of court petition filed by S. Vasudev. The plea said that despite the court’s order for scrutinising the allotment of ‘G’ category sites, necessary steps had not been taken by authorities concerned. However, the government has filed a statement that it has constituted the panel and has adhered to other directions of the court.
