MUDA Case: Petitioner Krishna Accuses Advocate General of Shielding Defendants

Bengaluru, Dec 7 (NationPress) The petitioner in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case, purportedly involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, claimed on Saturday that the Advocate General was prioritizing the protection of the accused rather than defending the government's interests.

Petitioner Snehamayi Krishna has addressed a letter to Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, expressing his discontent with the legal opinion he provided to the Urban Development Secretary concerning the property in survey number 464, situated in Kesare village, Kasaba Hobli on the outskirts of Mysuru city.

Krishna mentioned that he possesses a copy of the Advocate General's opinion submitted to the Secretary of the Urban Development Department, and he found it surprising.

“As a responsible officer, you have issued an opinion that favors the accused. Your stance appears to contradict the protection of government property, and I seek clarification along with the authorized documents on this matter,” Krishna articulated in his letter.

“In our democratic nation, the people are paramount. Your salary and resources stem from public funds, rendering you accountable to the citizens. I am submitting this petition under the provisions of Article 51A of the Constitution to scrutinize your actions and to call for accountability,” he asserted.

“The law dictates that property valued over Rs 100 must be mandatorily registered. Is it not unlawful to transfer property worth several lakhs based solely on informal statements? Is it acceptable for officials like you to endorse such actions?” Krishna questioned.

“According to the relinquishment deed, property rights were conferred to Mylarappa. How can it then be claimed as belonging to Ninga, also known as Javara, after a span of 23 years in 1993? The 1993 statement should have referenced the relinquishment deed of 1968. Is hiding this information and issuing a statement not against the law? Does this not constitute a crime? Do you consider this statement lawful?” Krishna inquired further.

He also raised concerns about how revenue officers managed to transfer the land to the fourth accused, landowner J. Devaraju.

“An investigation is warranted to determine the influence behind these actions,” Krishna remarked in his correspondence.

“Why have you (Advocate General) refrained from providing your opinion to initiate action against the involved officers? Is it not your responsibility to offer such counsel? You have indicated that the allotment of sites to the second accused, Parvathi, the spouse of CM Siddaramaiah, is legitimate.

“Despite the government notification stipulating that land allotments should not occur under a 50:50 ratio, fraudulent allotment letters were generated to suggest that such allotments are permissible. Is this not a crime?” Krishna demanded.

“The meeting's minutes were fabricated, and based on this, an allotment letter was issued for land allocation. Does this not constitute a crime? According to your advice, you concluded that the site allotment to CM Siddaramaiah’s wife, Parvathi, is appropriate,” he stated in his letter.

“There exists a regulation that dictates that the allotment must take place in the locality where the acquired land is situated. Following this rule, Parvathi should have received sites in Devanuru third stage locality. Why was she granted sites in the more upscale Vijayanagar locality?” Krishna challenged.

“All these details substantiate that CM Siddaramaiah used his influence to secure site allotments in the name of his wife while he was the Leader of Opposition,” he alleged.

In his extensive 10-page submission, Krishna cautioned, “If you fail to provide clarifications on these issues, I will have no choice but to file a complaint with the relevant authorities to initiate action.”

The case revolves around the allotment of 14 sites to CM Siddaramaiah’s family by the MUDA in a prime area of Mysuru city as compensation for their land acquired in Kesare village.

Currently, the Karnataka Lokayukta and Enforcement Directorate (ED) are investigating the matter.

Petitioner Krishna has appealed to the High Court to transfer the case to the CBI.

Recently, the ED communicated with the Lokayukta, indicating that its investigation has revealed illegal allotments.