Karnataka High Court dismisses Siddaramaiah’s petition; CM likely to face probe

The Chief Minister Siddaramaiah moved to the High Court on August 19 challenging the legality of the Governor's order.

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s petition challenging the Governor’s approval for investigation against him in a site allotment case. He challenged the Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot for an investigation against him in the alleged irregularities in the allotment of 14 sites to his wife by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) in a prime locality. 

After the completion of hearing of the petition, Justice M Nagaprasanna on September 12 reserved its verdict. It also extended its August 19 interim order directing the special court for people’s representatives which was slated to hear complaints against him in the case, to defer its proceedings till the disposal of the petition.

The Justice Nagaprasanna ruled, ” The facts narrated in the petition would undoubtedly require investigation, in the teeth of the fact that the beneficiary of all these acts is not anybody outside but the family of the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed.” He further said, “interim order of any kind subsisting today shall stand dissolved.”

One August 16, the Governor accorded sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 218 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the commission of the alleged offenses, mentioned in the petitions submitted to him by complainants Pradeep Kumar S P, T J Abraham and Snehamayi Krishna.

CM Siddaramaiah challenged Governor’s order in Karnataka High Court

The Chief Minister Siddaramaiah moved to the High Court on August 19 challenging the legality of the Governor’s order. In the petition, he submitted that the sanction order was issued without due application of mind in violation of statutory mandates, and contrary to constitutional principles, including the advice of the Council of Ministers, which is binding under Article 163 of the Constitution of India. He questioned the Governor’s order, contending that his decision is legally unsustainable, procedurally flawed, and motivated by extraneous considerations.

While noted lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Prof. Ravivarma Kumar had appeared for Siddaramaiah, Solicitor-General of India Tushar Mehta represented the office of the Governor. Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty also made his submissions. Senior Advocates Maninder Singh, Prabhuling K Navadgi, Lakshmi Iyengar, Ranganath Reddy, K G Raghavan, among others made submissions on behalf of the complainants (respondents) who had sought the sanction for investigation against Siddaramaiah.

What is MUDA scam case?

The MUDA site allotment case alleged that the compensatory sites were allotted to Siddaramaiah’s wife B M Paravathi in an upmarket area in Mysuru, which had higher property value as compared to the location of her land which had been “acquired” by the MUDA. The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvathi under a 50:50 ratio scheme in lieu of 3.16 acres of her land, where it developed a residential layout.

Under the MUDA scheme, 50 per cent of developed land was allotted to the land losers in lieu of undeveloped land acquired from them for forming residential layouts. It is alleged that Parvathi had no legal title over this 3.16 acres of land at survey number 464 of Kasare village, Kasaba hobli of Mysuru taluk.

(With PTI Inputs)