<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court </a>on Monday rejected the request placed by the state government to confine the interim order against the controversial October 18 government order to the petitioner. </p><p>The government order, issued a day before the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was planning to take out route marches in the state, restricts conglomeration of persons more than 10 in public places.</p>.RSS route march passes off peacefully in Chittapur.<p>On October 28, a single bench stayed the operation of the government order in a petition filed by the Punashchetana Seva Samsthe. The state government’s appeal challenging the interim order was dismissed by a division bench.</p><p>On Monday, Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty, appearing for the state government, requested the court to confine the interim order insofar as the petitioner is concerned. However, Justice M Nagaprasanna declined the request.</p><p>“Advocate General would now submit that the interim so granted be restricted only to the petitioners. The reasons rendered in the interim order granted by this court which stands now affirmed by the division bench is that the government order flies foul of the Chapter-III of the Constitution of India ie; the fundamental rights as obtained under 19 (1) and (b). In the light of the said circumstances it being in violative of the fundamental rights or Article 13 (2) as any fundamental right can be curtailed only by a law being made and not by a government order. The government order cannot be restricted only to the petitioners and permit it to become operational against others,” Justice Nagaprasanna said. The court directed the matter to be listed on December 15 since the Advocate General sought time of four weeks to file a statement of objections.</p><p>The government order, issued by the Home Department, required prior permission for any gathering of more than 10 persons on properties maintained by the state government, including schools, colleges, playgrounds, parks, roads and water bodies. These premises include the ones managed by local authority or department, Boards, corporation, the order said. It further stated that conglomeration of persons more than 10 in violation of the order would become an offence of unlawful assembly and trespass and such acts could also be penalised under Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita (BNS). While staying this order, the single bench had observed that the government order, prima facie, takes away the constitutional rights conferred upon citizens under chapter III of the constitution.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court </a>on Monday rejected the request placed by the state government to confine the interim order against the controversial October 18 government order to the petitioner. </p><p>The government order, issued a day before the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was planning to take out route marches in the state, restricts conglomeration of persons more than 10 in public places.</p>.RSS route march passes off peacefully in Chittapur.<p>On October 28, a single bench stayed the operation of the government order in a petition filed by the Punashchetana Seva Samsthe. The state government’s appeal challenging the interim order was dismissed by a division bench.</p><p>On Monday, Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty, appearing for the state government, requested the court to confine the interim order insofar as the petitioner is concerned. However, Justice M Nagaprasanna declined the request.</p><p>“Advocate General would now submit that the interim so granted be restricted only to the petitioners. The reasons rendered in the interim order granted by this court which stands now affirmed by the division bench is that the government order flies foul of the Chapter-III of the Constitution of India ie; the fundamental rights as obtained under 19 (1) and (b). In the light of the said circumstances it being in violative of the fundamental rights or Article 13 (2) as any fundamental right can be curtailed only by a law being made and not by a government order. The government order cannot be restricted only to the petitioners and permit it to become operational against others,” Justice Nagaprasanna said. The court directed the matter to be listed on December 15 since the Advocate General sought time of four weeks to file a statement of objections.</p><p>The government order, issued by the Home Department, required prior permission for any gathering of more than 10 persons on properties maintained by the state government, including schools, colleges, playgrounds, parks, roads and water bodies. These premises include the ones managed by local authority or department, Boards, corporation, the order said. It further stated that conglomeration of persons more than 10 in violation of the order would become an offence of unlawful assembly and trespass and such acts could also be penalised under Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita (BNS). While staying this order, the single bench had observed that the government order, prima facie, takes away the constitutional rights conferred upon citizens under chapter III of the constitution.</p>