In a major setback for Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed his plea challenging the Governor’s sanction to prosecute him in the alleged Mysore Urban Development Authority, or MUDA, scam.
“The complainants were justified in pursuing the complaint and seeking approval at the hands of the Governor,” observed a single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna as it dismissed Siddaramaiah’s plea.
“The facts narrated in the petition need investigation. The petition stands dismissed,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.
The HC further held that under normal circumstances, it is the duty of the Governor to act on the advice of council of ministers. However, he can take independent decision in exceptional circumstances and the present case is one such exception.
“The Governor under normal circumstances has to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers as under Article 163 of the constitution but can take independent decisions if exceptional circumstances arise. The present case projects one such exception. No fault can be found with the Governor exercising independent discretion to pass the impugned order. It would suffice if the reasons are recorded in the files of the decision making authority, particularly, of the high office. And those reasons succinctly form a part of the impugned order. A caveat, reasons must be filed. Reasons for the first time can’t be brought on record before the Court in the form of objections,” the high court said.
In his plea, Siddaramaiah challenged the sanction granted by Karnataka Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot to three people to file corruption case against the Chief Minister over land that MUDA granted to his wife B M Parvathi.
On Tuesday, Siddaramaiah’s lawyer requested the high court to stay the order for two weeks to enable the CM to file an appeal but the same was turned down.
“I can’t stay my own order. Any interim relief subsisting shall stand dissolved,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.
On August 19, the Karnataka High Court directed the trial court to defer all proceedings against Siddaramaiah, based on the governor’s sanction, till the next date of hearing before the HC.
Siddaramaiah had earlier argued that the Governor’s sanction order to prosecute him was bereft of any reasons on why he was prima facie guilty while adding that the Governor’s discretionary power in such cases was limited.
On July 26 this year, the sanctions were granted following complaints made by activists TJ Abraham, Snehamai Krishna and Pradeep Kumar SP.
As per the complaint, Siddaramaiah’s wife was “gifted” a land plot measuring a little over three acres by her brother Mallikarjuna Swamy which he claimed was bought by him in 2004. Such land was initially acquired, then de-notified, and bought by Swamy.
It was illegally developed by MUDA as private individuals owned it.
Parvathi sought and allegedly received highly inflated compensation which included 14 developed alternate plots of land that were much higher in value than the original three acres, under the 50:50 scheme.
When MUDA was unable to acquire land at a break-even price, it used to hand over a portion of the developed land to the person from whom it was acquired. Initially, it was 60 per cent of the developed land for MUDA and 40 per cent to the owner of the land. Subsequently, it became 50:50.
Siddaramaiah maintained that the decisions to compensate his wife were taken by MUDA independently and it did not have his interference or influence.
He also alleged that the Governor’s sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act to prosecute him was mala fide and taken without any application of mind.
With inputs from Bar and Bench.
Link to article –
Setback for Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah in graft case: ‘Governor not bound by Cabinet’s advice’
