RSS march row: HC dismisses Karnataka govt’s appeal
Dharwad: In a major setback to the Congress-led government in Karnataka, the Dharwad bench of Karnataka High Court on Thursday dismissed the state’s appeal petition over its order mandating permission for private organisations to hold activities in public areas.
A division bench headed by Justice S.G. Pandit and Geetha K.B. refused to interfere with the single bench order and asked the state to again approach the single-judge bench to seek further action.
The BJP and Hindu organisations claimed that the order was passed by the government targeting the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Minister Priyank Kharge, son of AICC President Mallikarjun Kharge, openly stated that now people can’t conduct foot marches by holding lathis, aiming at the RSS Centenary padayatra event.
The single-judge bench had earlier stayed the order of the state, and the government had challenged the single-judge bench’s decision before a division bench of the Karnataka High Court.
The court, which had heard the matter on November 4 and reserved it for orders and delivered its verdict on Thursday.
The division bench of the High Court stated that it had dismissed the state government’s appeal against the interim stay granted by a single-judge bench on the government’s notification.
Further, the division bench in Dharwad has directed that the matter be resolved before the single-judge bench itself, marking another setback for the state government.
Recently, the state government issued an order restricting RSS activities in public and government-owned spaces. Challenging this order, the organisation Punaschetana Seva Samsthe and others had approached the High Court.
Hearing the petition, Justice M. Nagaprasanna’s single-judge bench had granted an interim stay on the government’s order on October 28. The government then appealed against this stay before a division bench of the High Court. Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, arguing for the government, submitted that the restriction was imposed only to prevent damage to government property.
He argued that private organisations cannot conduct programmes on government premises without permission — just as one cannot hold an event in an empty High Court building, the use of public spaces also requires prior permission.
Countering this, senior advocate Ashok Haranahalli, appearing for the respondents, argued that not all parks and playgrounds should automatically be treated as government properties.
“If such rules are made, would even playing cricket on a ground require official permission?” he asked.
He further argued that under the Police Act, the authority to take such action rests only with the District Magistrate, and that the government could have filed an application before the same single-judge bench to vacate the interim stay instead of appealing. After hearing arguments from both sides on November 4, the Dharwad division bench had reserved its judgment.