Mysuru: The 14 prime sites allotted by Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) to CM Siddaramaiah’s wife, B.M. Parvathi, under a 50:50 ratio, has become a major setback for the CM’s family.

Acting on a Court directive, the Lokayukta registered an FIR against the CM, his family members and others on Friday.

Though Siddaramaiah has repeatedly claimed the allotment was legal, the documents involved raise doubts and ambiguities. These concerns led the Court to order a Lokayukta investigation into the matter.

Details of land deal

MUDA sanctioned 14 sites in Vijayanagar on a 50:50 basis to Parvathi for developing 3.16 acres of land in Kesare Survey No. 464, which she owned but was never acquired by MUDA.

However, the land originally belonged to Ninga and was acquired by MUDA in 1997 for the formation of Devanur Layout’s Third Stage. This land was later denotified in 1998 and the Chief Minister’s brother-in-law, Mallikarjunaswamy (Parvathi’s brother), purchased it from Devaraju, an heir of Ninga, in 2004.

Later, Mallikarjunaswamy gifted the land to his sister, Parvathi, making her the owner. Though Siddaramaiah insists the deal was genuine, records suggest otherwise. It appears that Parvathi was not the rightful owner; MUDA was the actual owner. Furthermore, Mallikarjunaswamy’s purchase of the land from Devaraju is being questioned as invalid.

While it’s claimed that MUDA denotified the land in 1998, RTC records show the land still belonged to MUDA. In 2001, MUDA formed Devanur Layout’s Third Stage and distributed sites to beneficiaries.

This raises the critical question: How did Mallikarjunaswamy acquire land classified as agricultural when MUDA had already developed it into a layout and allotted sites?

Concerns over land conversion

Moreover, Mallikarjunaswamy secured a land use conversion for residential purposes from the then Deputy Commissioner on July 15, 2005. This raises concerns about whether the officials failed to inspect the site or overlooked the fact that the RTC still listed MUDA as the owner.

Mallikarjunaswamy gifted this land, still classified as agricultural, to Parvathi on Aug. 6, 2010. Subsequently, the Khata was transferred to her name and revenue was paid.

The key issue here is how land that had been converted for residential purposes in 2005 was suddenly classified as agricultural — a point highlighted by the advocates representing the respondents in a case filed by CM Siddaramaiah in the High Court, challenging the Governor’s sanction for his prosecution in the MUDA alternative sites allotment scam.

In 2017, Parvathi applied to MUDA, seeking the allotment of alternative land under a 50:50 ratio, claiming that MUDA had developed her 3.16 acres of land without proper acquisition. In response, MUDA allotted 14 sites in Vijayanagar Layout in 2021.

Purchase deemed illegal

However, questions have been raised about how the land, developed by MUDA in 2001, was classified as agricultural land by 2004. Furthermore, Mallikarjunaswamy’s purchase of this land from Devaraju has been deemed illegal.

Advocates for the respondents also highlighted the need for an investigation into how the then Deputy Commissioner granted a change of land use to Mallikarjunaswamy in 2005, despite the land already being developed by MUDA. They pointed out inconsistencies in how the land, which had been issued a change of use for residential purposes in 2005, was later registered as agricultural land under Parvathi’s name.

Moreover, the advocates argued that the land where MUDA had formed a layout and allotted sites in 2001 rightfully belonged to MUDA, not Parvathi.

In summary, the advocates raised concerns about the land acquisition, denotification, the sale of the land by Devaraju to Mallikarjunaswamy, the change of land use, the gift deed to Parvathi as agricultural land, and the subsequent allotment of alternative sites under the 50:50 ratio. The Court took these issues into consideration when ordering a Lokayukta probe into the alleged illegal allotment of alternative sites to Parvathi.