Sonia Gandhi, the president of the Indian National Congress (INC) is a very
sad lady now, because she has lost the state of Karnataka in the Assembly
Elections held in May 2008. Sonia Gandhi had many plans for poor and the
minorities in the state of Karnataka, and also for the Dalits, the down-trodden,
Aam Aadmi, but most of these sections of the about 5 crores of the electorates
voted against INC.
   The newspapers in their editorials harp on the fact that the vote share of the
INC or Congress is higher than that of BJP. This is a deliberate attempt to
mislead the readers and the citizens.
   The percentage of vote share they are talking of is on the basis of total
registered voters in the state and not the total population. Everyone is aware of
the fact that not all people have their names in the voter lists.
   Secondly, from among the voters list only about 65% have exercised their
franchise indicating that those who did not turn up at the hustings are not
voting for any party and therefore they are not voting for either Congress or
BJP, nor JD(S), the third party in the state.
   How can one calculate the voters preference on the basis of the total
registered voters?
   Let us take an example of what happened in a hypothetical constituency,  
Adyargopalnagar.  In Adyargopalnagar  the total electorate is 1,00,000 and
45% chose not to come to the booths to vote. 65,000 voters voted for 6
candidates of which the votes were cast as per details given below:
BJP candidate 22,000, Congress candidate 19,000, JD(S) candidate 13,000,
SP candidate 6,000, BSP candidate 3,000, and an Independent candidate
2,000.

   The BJP candidate was declared elected although 78% of the registered
voters either voted against him, or voted in preference to other parties or
candidates, or refrained from exercising their right to vote. Still in a democracy
like India the process of voting is on a multi-party, multi-choice method. This
method is not at all coercive or imposing. Everyone is free to pick their choice
as they wish. It is most fair to have it this way.

By Mohan Shenoy.
Adyar Gopal Parivar
News Items published on this website in the past
BACK TO PAST NEWS INDEX
Bharatiya Janata Party Government in Karnaataka
By Mohan Shenoy
BACK TO HOME PAGE
SUB-HOME PAGE
PAST ARTICLES INDEX
BJP forms Karnataka Government, finally!
News for the month of June 2008.
28th March 2010.
Bharathiya Janata Party wins
majority in Greater Bangalore Metropolitan
Council 2010.
By Mohan Shenoy
Bangalore or Bengaluru is the name given to a large metropolis in the state of
Karnataka, in the Indian Union.
     Bengaluru is also the capital of Karnataka state and the population of this
city is around 6 million but for a authentic figure one should wait for the census
of 2011 to be completed.
     Like all major cities, Bengaluru also is entitled to be ruled by elected
representatives from the population. The elected body is called the Corporation
of Brihath Bengaluru Mahaanagar Palike (BBMP). (Greater Bangalore
Metropolitan Council.)
     About three years ago the state government expanded the land area of
Bangalore city and called it Greater Bangalore. The council of the older
Bangalore was dissolved and a new corporation council was proposed. The
elections to the corporators' posts are held on 28th March 2010.
     The results gave a massive preference for the Bharathiya Janata Party.
The council will meet and decide on the Mayor and other office bearers. The
mandate for the new council is obvious. The developmental work done during
the past year or two is encouraging.

Concluded.
News for the month of May 2011

THE MORAL OBLIGATION TO RESIGN
By Mohan Shenoy
   Who is morally obliged to resign a position of authority in a democracy?
There has been demands from various quarters that the Speaker of the
Legislative Assembly of the state of Karnaataka should resign from his position
of an authority since the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has allegedly placed a
stricture regarding his actions just ahead of the Trust vote in October 2010.

   There is also a demand for the Governor of Karnaataka to resign from his
post since he is allegedly engaged in party activities on behalf of his parent
party, the Congress. The Governor requested the President of India to impose
President's rule in Karnaataka in October 2010 after the first Trust vote because
the Trust vote was not in order, according to the media reports. Again the
Governor sent a special report to the President in May 2011 following the
Supreme Court verdict re-instating the 16 disqualified MLAs. This time the
Governor claimed, according to the media reports, that the BJP government has
lost the moral right to continue to be in office because the second Trust vote
taken in October 2010 winning which the BJP government in Karnaataka
continued to remain in office was now invalid since the 16 MLAs whose
disqualification was to be reverted and it is to be assumed that they would have
defied the Whip and voted against the government.

   But this argument also did not convince the President of India to impose the
President's rule in Karnaataka as requested by the Governor, according the
media reports.

   Now considering that both the Speaker and the Governor have been regarded
as at fault by one or other quarters, the question arises if they are both equally
guilty? The Speaker was criticized only once by the Supreme Court, but the
Governor has been ignored twice by the Central government and the President.
The Governor should resign.
Family Lines
Public Importance
GENERAL ARTICLES
CIVIC SUBJECTS
OBITUARY INDEX
TOUR  DESTINATIONS
YOUR CHOICE
FACEBOOK
YOUTUBE
ANNUAL CONVENTIONS
HINDU  FESTIVALS
Twitter
HELP FROM GOD
FEEDBACK
READ BOOKS
AUTHORED BY
MOHAN SHENOY
HINDI BOOK