Follow: Karnataka Government

Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More

Unions representing employees of Karnataka’s state-run road transport corporations have intensified demands for immediate payment of pending salary arrears and a comprehensive pay revision. Leaders from the four state transport corporations — KSRTC, BMTC, NWKRTC and KKRTC — met Chief Minister Siddaramaiah to press for resolution of long-standing issues. Their demands include release of arrears accumulated over three years, merger of allowances into basic pay, and a structured wage revision. However, the meeting ended without a firm decision, leaving workers anxious about their financial future and signalling the possibility of fresh protests.

The likelihood of protests has also prompted discussions within the government on how to prepare contingency plans. Senior officials are said to be evaluating whether essential services can be maintained using temporary staff or limited fleets in the event of a strike. However, union leaders have warned that any attempt to dilute worker participation or break their unity will only worsen tensions. They argue that the government must prioritise constructive negotiation rather than exploring alternatives that undermine workers’ rights. The administration, for its part, faces a delicate situation in appeasing employees without destabilising public services.

For commuters across Karnataka, memories of earlier bus strikes remain vivid. During previous agitations, thousands of passengers were stranded at bus stands, forcing many to pay steep fares in private vehicles. Students preparing for board exams, daily wage workers, and patients needing to travel long distances for medical treatment were among those most affected. This history has raised a sense of urgency among the public, who fear the same disruption could occur again if the current dispute escalates. The growing public anxiety is now adding pressure on the government to find rapid solutions.

Many transport workers have also voiced concerns about retirement benefits, an issue they feel has been overshadowed by the wage dispute. Drivers and conductors say that even after decades of public service, they retire with insufficient benefits to meet basic needs. Some employees have demanded that pension schemes be strengthened and that retirement eligibility rules be made more inclusive. They argue that long working hours, irregular schedules, and exposure to road-related risks justify stronger social security. Union leaders believe that including pension reforms in the current negotiations will provide long-term stability and better worker morale.

Another point raised by the unions pertains to unsafe working conditions. Workers claim that long hours on poorly maintained roads, inadequate rest facilities, and lack of stress-relief support contribute to health problems among staff. They say that drivers often complete lengthy shifts without proper breaks, especially on rural routes where turnaround times are tight. Conductors handling overcrowded buses face strain too, particularly during festival seasons or school hours. Unions insist that addressing workplace safety must go hand in hand with wage correction, as public service cannot be sustained on exhausted, undervalued labour.

The issue has sparked debate over how public transport should be financed in the long term. Some policy observers suggest that the state needs a more predictable funding mechanism for RTCs, similar to the way education and healthcare budgets are allocated. They argue that relying solely on ticket revenue, while expanding free-travel schemes and maintaining low fares, puts unsustainable pressure on corporations. A separate transport welfare fund, financed by urban planning taxes, fuel cess, or dedicated levies, has been floated as a possible solution. Such models, experts say, could stabilise budgets while protecting worker rights.

Private bus operators have also begun watching the situation closely. While some welcome the possibility of increased business during a strike, many fear that large-scale dependency on private fleets may trigger regulatory chaos. They worry that sudden increases in demand will strain their capacity, lead to inflated fares, and draw public criticism. Operators say that they do not want to appear as profiteers during public distress. Instead, they support a solution that keeps RTC fleets stable. The industry has therefore urged the government to solve the dispute before it spirals into an uncontrolled market shift.

Civil society groups and labour activists have begun expressing solidarity with the workers. They argue that the struggle is not merely about wages, but about respect for essential service providers who maintain public mobility. Activists claim that the state must stop treating transport employees as replaceable labour and instead recognise them as custodians of a crucial public good. Some groups are planning awareness campaigns to highlight worker grievances and encourage commuters to support dignified labour rights, even if it means temporary inconvenience. The unions see such support as vital in building broad-based pressure.

The next round of talks is expected to be a turning point. Union leaders have made it clear that they will not settle for symbolic gestures or partial settlements. They want a time-bound commitment on wage revision, arrears disbursal, pension improvements, and workplace safety reforms. For the government, any decision will have implications beyond transport policy, potentially influencing labour negotiations in other public sectors. The resolution of the RTC conflict will therefore serve as a test of political will, fiscal planning, and the state’s regard for working-class welfare. The outcome may redefine the balance between public needs and worker dignity in Karnataka.

Union representatives argued that the delay in wage enhancement has placed severe financial stress on employees, especially drivers, conductors, and mechanics, many of whom have had to bear rising costs of living without salary corrections. Multiple rounds of discussions over the past months have not resulted in a concrete outcome. At the latest meeting, the Chief Minister reportedly offered to release only a portion of the arrears instead of the complete amount sought by employees. Union leaders expressed disappointment, calling the offer “inadequate,” leading to a stalemate that has triggered fears of strikes across the state.

TRANSPORT SERVICES AT RISK AS TRUST BREAKS DOWN

The unresolved dispute has raised concerns over the continuity of bus services across Karnataka. Union leaders have warned that unless the government responds holistically, they may revive strike plans that were temporarily held back earlier this year. An indefinite transport strike would heavily impact daily commuters, many of whom depend solely on state buses, particularly in rural areas. Students, workers, and women commuters are expected to face the harshest consequences in the event of disruption. The uncertainty has pushed many commuters to prepare alternative arrangements, despite the fact that private transport operators have expressed limitations in taking on such a massive load.

Workers say their frustration stems from years of being promised solutions that never materialised. State welfare schemes such as free bus travel for women, rollouts of new fleets with electric buses, and other public commitments are viewed favourably by commuters, but employees argue that these initiatives place additional operational stress without being accompanied by fair remuneration. Many rank-and-file workers claim the mismatch between rising workload and stagnant income has forced them into debt. The unions emphasise that public service workers should not be left financially vulnerable as they uphold essential mobility for the state.

The unions also insist that the government must recognise the vital link between fair pay and quality of service. They argue that professional dignity and long-term retention of experienced staff are key to maintaining efficient transportation services. Repeated delays, they claim, weaken staff morale, discourage new recruits from joining the sector, and compromise public safety and service quality. For the government, the challenge is to resolve the situation without compromising its budget priorities, as various welfare and infrastructure schemes are already imposing pressure on state finances.

ECONOMIC IMPACT: BALANCING FINANCE AND WORKFORCE EXPECTATIONS

The demand for full arrears settlement comes at a time when the state is grappling with fiscal constraints. Officials have pointed to pandemic-era losses, rising fuel and maintenance expenses, and additional expenditure on public schemes as factors limiting the government’s ability to meet all union demands immediately. The state’s transport corporations continue to face operational challenges, with fluctuating revenue streams and increasing pressure to expand bus fleets without proportionate funding. Economists note that reforms such as fare restructuring and operational efficiency measures may be required to ensure long-term stability.

Union leaders, however, reject the notion that workers should bear responsibility for financial shortfalls. They argue that employees are being penalized for structural failures and policy decisions beyond their control. According to them, wage revision and arrears payment are essential rights, not concessions. Any fiscal restructuring, they insist, must protect worker benefits while addressing systemic gaps. They advocate for transparent audits, periodic salary reviews, allocation of fixed drivers for electric buses, and clear policies that safeguard workers’ interests amid technological and operational shifts.

As the dispute deepens, stakeholders emphasise the need for a cooperative solution rather than confrontation. Experts suggest that a middle-path approach — releasing arrears in phases, fixing a clear timeline for pay revision, and creating safeguards for workers — may ease tensions. At the same time, accountability measures and strategic planning could help improve the financial health of the transport corporations, ensuring that neither workers nor commuters face recurring crises. The outcome will likely shape how essential public services are managed and valued in the state.

POLITICAL PRESSURE, PUBLIC EXPECTATION, AND THE ROAD AHEAD

The government has scheduled another round of negotiations with the unions, signalling an intent to avoid escalation. The Transport Minister is expected to reassess financial options and present revised proposals. However, the unions have indicated that without a firm commitment, they will not rule out agitation. The situation places the state leadership under growing political pressure, as prolonged instability in the transport sector could reflect poorly on governance, especially in regions where bus networks are indispensable for education, employment, and healthcare access.

Public expectations are rising, with commuter groups urging both sides to reach a timely agreement. Any prolonged standoff risks eroding trust in public transport and shifting commuter dependency to private vehicles, which may increase congestion, costs, and inequality in mobility access. The coming days may prove decisive not only for the fate of RTC workers but also for the future of Karnataka’s transportation model. Resolution will require balancing fiscal realities with labour rights, and acknowledging that sustainable mobility depends on a motivated workforce.

Follow: Karnataka Government

Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More

A cryptic social-media post by the Deputy Chief Minister of Karnataka, D.K. Shivakumar, declaring “Word power is world power,” has triggered fresh speculation about internal power dynamics within the state’s ruling party. Posted amid simmering tension over the future of the Chief Minister’s post, the message appears to rekindle debate over a rumored leadership transition. Political observers now view Shivakumar’s words as a pointed reminder to party insiders — and perhaps a warning that commitments must be honoured. The timing of the post, just days after the government completed half its term, suggests that the push for clarity on leadership may be intensifying.

While Shivakumar later denied having authored the post — calling it “fake” — the message remains visible on his feed, keeping the speculation alive. Several senior leaders within the party and loyalists have begun interpreting the phrase as a subtle assertion over the coveted top post, believed to be due for rotation based on an alleged agreement. With the state’s political environment already under strain from the tug-of-war, the post has stoked public interest, media scrutiny, and internal uncertainty over who will steer Karnataka’s government in the next phase.

A Veiled Message or a Direct Challenge? What Shivakumar’s Post Means

In the post, Shivakumar shared a black-and-white photograph of himself, accompanied by the quote: “Keeping one’s word is greatest strength in the world! Word power is world power. The biggest force in the world was to keep one’s word… everyone has to walk the talk.” Many interpret this as a veiled reference to a past understanding within his party about leadership rotation — an understanding that, according to his supporters, promised him the top seat after two-and-a-half years in office. That deadline has reportedly been crossed, reviving hope among his camp that the agreement will now be honoured.

Immediately after the post, the state’s political climate became tense. Rumours swirled that Shivakumar held late-night meetings with allied ministers and faction leaders, suggesting attempts to gauge support for a possible leadership change. Some MLAs from his camp reportedly flew to Delhi to press their demand before the party high command. The message — though cryptic — is being treated as more than words; it is being seen as a strategic move to shape opinion within the party and among the public.

Importantly, even as speculation heightens, Shivakumar’s denial has added layers of ambiguity. When questioned, he reportedly said the viral post was “fake” and that he had not posted it. Nevertheless, the post continues to draw eyeballs, making it unclear whether it was a drafting error, an unauthorized edit, or a deliberate political statement. Either way, the message has done its job — it has drawn attention, provoked conversation, and forced stakeholders to respond.

Despite this public confusion, sources within the party say talks are underway to placate both camps. High-level meetings with central leadership have been reportedly scheduled to address the issue directly and prevent internal discord from turning into a full-blown crisis. The message from party insiders is that while ambition is natural, the official stance will depend on consensus — and the high command will ultimately decide the matter.

Power Struggle Unfolds: What the State’s Top Leadership Says

Not long after Shivakumar’s post, the state’s Chief Minister, Siddaramaiah, responded — not with anger, but with what analysts call a rhetorical counterpunch. He posted on social media that “a word is not power unless it betters the world for the people,” emphasising that his commitment is to public welfare, not political deals. He underscored that the mandate given by voters was for a full five-year term, and asserted that governance should focus on delivering public welfare rather than chair-related calculations.

Siddaramaiah pointed to implementation of social-welfare guarantee schemes and infrastructure promises fulfilled so far, arguing that governance is about delivery, not deals. With electoral prospects for the ruling party and public interest at stake, he conveyed that holding onto office is not a matter of ego but of continued administrative responsibility. His post appeared to be designed to reaffirm his legitimacy while subtly rebutting suggestions of an internal agreement involving power rotation.

The rapid exchange of cryptic verdicts between the two top leaders has sent ripples across Karnataka’s political fabric, stirring speculation, fueling media debate, and capturing public attention. While Congress top brass and state leaders call for calm and collective decision-making, grassroots activists, opposition parties and media houses treat the incident as evidence of brewing internal conflict — one that could reshape the political narrative in Karnataka for years to come.

Political Fallout: Internal Factions, Public Perception, and Opposition Gains

The fallout from the post has extended beyond party corridors into public discourse. Among local politicians, there is visible unease over the optics of disunity, especially with upcoming elections on the horizon. Some senior leaders, worried about dissent, have tried to downplay the issue, urging both sides to avoid “public spectacle.” Others — particularly those aligned with Shivakumar — view the post as a long-overdue nudge to honour past promises. This divide is prompting jockeying for position, with some leaders reportedly repositioning themselves in anticipation of possible reshuffles.

For opposition parties, this has been an opportunity to raise questions about the ruling party’s stability. They argue that such tussles distract from governance and policy delivery, pointing out delays in welfare schemes, unmet public commitments, and administrative inertia. In media commentary, some analysts warn that the power struggle could deepen rural–urban divides, regional fault lines, and caste-based politics — if not managed carefully. The public mood appears mixed: while many citizens express frustration over political infighting, some see this as the first step toward accountability and transparency within the party.

At grass-roots level, local Congress workers in several districts have reportedly expressed confusion and concern over shifting loyalties. In some regions, supporters of Shivakumar have demanded clarity and assertiveness, while workers close to Siddaramaiah have sought reassurance that governance and implementation will not be affected. The uncertainty has already disrupted party activities in a few constituencies, and morale appears fragile. For a party that won strongly two years ago, the internal rift risks eroding organizational cohesion just months before crucial electoral tests.

Meanwhile, the rival Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has seized the opportunity to highlight what it calls “Congress chaos.” Party spokespersons and media cells have amplified the narrative that Congress is consumed by internal ambition, neglecting public issues such as inflation, infrastructure neglect, and law-and-order problems. In public rallies and social media posts, the BJP has used Shivakumar’s message to question the credibility of the government and demand early polls, arguing that the people’s mandate is being undermined by internal political games.

What Happens Next — High Command, Compromise or Crisis?

As the dust settles from public exchanges, all eyes are now on the central leadership of the Congress party. Observers expect a high-profile meeting in New Delhi involving senior leaders, including national party heads, to try and defuse the tension. The objective is likely to be a negotiated settlement that preserves party unity, ensures continuation of welfare governance, and prevents electoral damage. The high command is under pressure to act fast — prolonged uncertainty could deepen factionalism, erode public confidence, and open the door for rival parties to exploit the instability.

Possible outcomes include reaffirming the current leadership till the end of the term, announcing a formal rotational agreement, or reshuffling the cabinet to accommodate both camps without compromising stability. Some suggest the party may also attempt to formalize internal power-sharing through documented agreements to avoid ambiguity later, though rivals warn this could further complicate internal dynamics by inviting more claimants. For now, party insiders stress the importance of consensus, communication, and avoiding public conflicts.

In the public sphere, politicians, analysts and citizens alike are watching closely. The post-by-post verbal sparring may soon take on more concrete dimensions — resignations, loyalty shifts, or formal public demands. Observers caution that if the dispute escalates beyond symbolic gestures, it could disrupt governance, stall schemes, and delay development initiatives at a time when the state faces economic and social challenges. The coming weeks could determine not just who leads, but how stable governance will be maintained in Karnataka.

Conclusion: When Words Become Weapons in Political Chess

D.K. Shivakumar’s terse declaration “Word power is world power” may appear simple, yet in Karnataka’s charged political context, it has transformed into a loaded statement — one that threatens to unsettle existing power structures. It underscores how in politics, language can carry weight far beyond grammar — evoking expectations, stirring anxieties, and igniting power plays. As the state’s leadership tussle unfolds under public gaze, the true impact of that one phrase may determine not just who sits at the helm, but the direction Karnataka takes in the coming years.

For now, Shivakumar’s post stands as a symbol of ambition, impatience, and demand for accountability. The contrasting response by Siddaramaiah emphasises that governance and fulfilment of public trust matter more than private deals. The Congress high command faces a critical test — to balance internal ambition, public expectations, and electoral considerations without letting “word play” overshadow real work.

Follow: Karnataka Government

Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More

Follow: Karnataka Government

Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More

The Karnataka political landscape is preparing for a dramatic confrontation as Leader of the Opposition and senior BJP leader V. Sunil Kumar announced that the party will move a no-confidence motion against the Siddaramaiah-led Congress government during the upcoming Assembly session in Belagavi. Addressing reporters, Kumar alleged that the Congress government has “failed on every governance parameter,” including price control, irrigation support, welfare implementation, and management of law and order. This announcement sets the stage for a heated legislative battle, where the opposition aims to corner the government both politically and morally. The ruling Congress, however, has asserted that it is not threatened by the move.

Kumar accused the government of “turning its back on the common man” even after making large promises in the 2023 Assembly election campaign. The opposition leader claimed that the government’s five guarantee schemes were poorly implemented, lacked transparency, and created fiscal strain while ignoring critical sectors such as agriculture and infrastructure development. He further alleged that resources meant for essential development projects were being diverted to generate political mileage. According to him, the upcoming Belagavi session will serve as a platform to expose the government’s “inefficiencies and misplaced priorities,” forcing it to answer for its administrative choices.

He also claimed that the Siddaramaiah administration has failed to adequately respond to farmer distress, including issues related to drought relief and compensation. Karnataka has been facing deficient rainfall and crop loss across several districts, yet the state government has been accused of delayed action. Kumar asserted that farmers have been “left waiting endlessly” for relief, even though crop damage reports have been submitted by district officials. He argued that the government’s responsibility goes beyond offering assurances and must translate into timely support, failing which the agricultural sector may face irreversible damage.

The BJP, Kumar said, intends to hold the government accountable for “worsening law and order conditions,” citing reported incidents of violence, drug trade expansion, and alleged political interference in police functioning. According to the opposition’s narrative, the state’s policing has weakened due to administrative influence, affecting investigation quality and citizen safety. The BJP will, therefore, use the no-confidence motion to demand clarity on policing reforms, budget allocations for security upgrades, and autonomous functioning of the police department. Kumar emphasized that security concerns impact not just urban areas but also rural communities increasingly affected by theft, illegal trade, and substance abuse.

The Congress government has responded by dismissing the allegations as “politically motivated drama.” Senior ministers close to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah have publicly stated that the government is running efficiently and that the guarantees have directly benefited millions. They argue that the opposition fears the popularity of these schemes and is attempting to shift public attention from their effectiveness. Ministers have further claimed that the BJP lacks credibility to question welfare spending since it “failed to provide financial stability or relief to vulnerable citizens” during its own tenure. They insist that the Congress remains confident of defending its policies on the floor of the House.

INTENSIFYING WAR OF WORDS AHEAD OF SESSION

As the Belagavi session approaches, the rhetoric from both sides continues to escalate. Kumar has maintained that the government used “inflated statistics” to justify expenditures under its guarantee schemes, and that auditors must verify whether funds were distributed without bias. The opposition contends that while welfare initiatives have been launched with much publicity, the state is facing a rising fiscal deficit, and revenue-generating departments are being neglected. Ministers from the Congress countered by stating that the guarantees were budgeted responsibly and backed by progressive taxation and rational fund allocation. They also highlighted that social justice cannot be sidelined merely to show fiscal conservatism.

The BJP is also planning to raise concerns over the government’s handling of irrigation allocations, particularly in relation to the ongoing issues surrounding reservoir water distribution for drought-affected regions. Kumar accused the government of “playing politics over water,” claiming that no long-term strategies were being implemented for tank rehabilitation, micro-irrigation, or groundwater recharge. He alleged that farmers were being made to depend entirely on short-term relief instead of systemic agricultural planning. The Congress, meanwhile, insists that several irrigation projects have been expedited and that negotiations on inter-state river disputes are being handled diplomatically and responsibly.

The political rivalry has further widened with the BJP alleging that the Congress government is using guarantees as a “shield against scrutiny.” According to Kumar, any questioning of governance is met with claims that opposition leaders are anti-poor or against welfare. He maintained that while BJP is not opposing subsidies, it demands clarity on funding models, sustainability, and whether sector-specific development has been sacrificed. Congress ministers responded that opposition criticism has been contradictory and lacks alternative policy suggestions, stating that governance debates must be constructive rather than “obstructionist in tone and intent.”

BELAGAVI SESSION POISED TO BECOME CRUCIAL POLITICAL ARENA

The Belagavi session is traditionally a politically charged event, with past administrations using the platform to pass key legislation or respond to major public issues. This year, however, the session’s atmosphere is expected to be even more intense, as the no-confidence motion offers the opposition a structured opportunity to interrogate governance lapses. Political observers note that the Congress holds a comfortable majority and is not expected to lose the vote. Yet, the motion itself carries symbolic weight, allowing the BJP to frame a narrative of incompetence and administrative failure ahead of future electoral battles, including the Lok Sabha polls.

Kumar also hinted that multiple issues will be raised beyond the no-trust motion, including alleged favoritism in appointments to boards and corporations, misuse of government advertisements, and reduction of funds for rural infrastructure development. He stated that while guarantees are being used to project a pro-poor image, sectors such as public works, transport, and skill development have seen budgetary neglect. The Congress refuted these charges, asserting that development and welfare are being balanced, and that prioritizing vulnerable communities is a constitutional and moral responsibility. They challenged the BJP to present alternatives instead of merely criticizing.

The upcoming legislative debate is expected to feature extensive discussions on fiscal management, where both parties will attempt to establish themselves as more responsible stewards of the state’s economy. Economists and analysts will closely follow the proceedings to understand whether Karnataka’s welfare-heavy governance model can coexist with capital expenditure requirements and industrial competitiveness. While Congress claims that welfare generates consumer spending and boosts the economy, the BJP warns that debt growth without structural planning could impede long-term stability. The session’s financial discourse may influence wider national conversations about welfare-oriented governance.

Political experts argue that the no-confidence motion is not merely a procedural move but a strategic platform for influencing public perception. The BJP is expected to highlight its governance track record in Karnataka and compare its approach with the current administration, aiming to project itself as more development-focused. The Congress will likely emphasize its welfare outreach and argue that inclusive governance requires prioritizing citizen benefit over corporate growth. Both sides will attempt to claim moral leadership, using statistics, testimonies, and ideological framing to win public opinion beyond the Assembly hall.

The session’s conclusion will not mark the end of the political contest. Parties are preparing to intensify their public campaigns, using speeches from the Assembly as soundbites to influence voter sentiment. For the BJP, the no-trust motion serves as a rallying point to unify its cadres across districts, while the Congress aims to defend its policy legacy and counter allegations with grassroots messaging. Karnataka’s politics is thus entering a phase of heightened confrontation, where governance debates will directly shape electoral dynamics. Regardless of the outcome within the Assembly, the real battle for public perception is set to continue in villages, towns, and urban centers across the state.

Past no-confidence motions in Karnataka have often served more as public opinion battles than attempts to change the government. Historical examples show that even when the ruling party enjoys a clear majority, opposition parties use the motion to bring critical issues into the spotlight. Analysts believe that the Belagavi session will follow a similar pattern, where debate performance, data presentation, and emotional messaging will be used to influence voters ahead of upcoming elections. While the outcome is predictable, the narrative formed through the debate may shape political discourse for months.

Political strategists also point out that Karnataka’s unique regional dynamics will play a role in how both sides frame their arguments. The BJP may focus heavily on areas such as coastal Karnataka, Hyderabad-Karnataka, and Mumbai-Karnataka regions, where it seeks to consolidate votes by attacking governance lapses. The Congress, meanwhile, could highlight guarantee scheme beneficiaries in rural areas, seeking to translate welfare delivery into enduring loyalty. The debate in Belagavi may thus be crafted not only for legislators but for targeted voter groups across the state.

Observers suggest that the no-confidence motion could prompt internal rifts within both parties if not strategically managed. BJP leaders must present a united front, minimizing factional disputes and projecting a cohesive alternative vision. On the other hand, Congress must ensure that its ministers offer consistent, data-backed responses to avoid mixed messaging that could weaken its defence. The performance of individual leaders during the debate may influence their political stature within respective parties, shaping leadership equations in the coming years.

Ultimately, the Belagavi session is unlikely to topple the government, but it may alter the trajectory of political conversation in Karnataka. The no-trust motion represents a symbolic challenge to Siddaramaiah’s governance model, pushing both sides to articulate their competing visions for the state. Public attention will be focused not on the vote count but on the substance of arguments, the credibility of claims, and the emotional resonance of the debate. As Karnataka watches closely, the Assembly hall in Belagavi is set to become a theatre for one of the most defining political confrontations of the year.

Follow: Karnataka Government

Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More