/>

Don’t take coercive step against H.D. Kumaraswamy till March 27 in Kethaganahalli land encroachment case: Karnataka High Court  

A notice, dated March 18, had been issued to the Union Minister to show-cause why criminal case should not be registered for allegedly encroaching on government land in Kethaganahalli village of Bidadi hobli of Ramanagara taluk

Updated - March 25, 2025 09:45 am IST - Bengaluru

Earth movers had turned up at the farm house of Union Minister of Major Industries H. D. Kumaraswamy on March 18 following a court order to remove encroachments at Ketaganahalli near Bidadi.

Earth movers had turned up at the farm house of Union Minister of Major Industries H. D. Kumaraswamy on March 18 following a court order to remove encroachments at Ketaganahalli near Bidadi. | Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

The High Court of Karnataka on Monday directed the State government not to take any coercive step till March 27 against Union Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy based on a notice, dated March 18, issued to him to show-cause why criminal case should not be registered against him for allegedly encroaching upon certain portions of government lands in survey numbers 7, 8, and 9 of the Kethaganahalli village of Bidadi hobli of Ramanagara taluk.

Justice N.S Sanjay Gowda passed the interim order on the petition filed by Mr. Kumaraswamy while adjourning further hearing till March 27.

Senior advocate Udaya Holla, appearing for Mr. Kumaraswamy along with advocate Nishanth A.V., argued that the tahsildar had no jurisdiction to issue notice under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, as was amended in 2024-25.

Stating that Mr. Kumaraswamy had purchased several land in Kethaganahalli village during 1985-87 through different registered sale deeds, it was claimed that all documents clearly and categorically substantiate that the petitioner, his vendors had valid right, title and interest over these lands. Mr. Kumaraswamy is in lawful possession of these lands from past four decades, it was stated in the petition.

Earlier enquiry

While pointing out that the revenue authorities had initiated proceedings against him with respect to same lands earlier, it was contended in the petition that the authorities had dropped the earlier proceedings against him after he furnished necessary information and documents related to the these lands.

The petition said that though the notice was dated March 18, it was delivered to him by post on March 20 and the notice does not contain three of the four documents, based on which the notice was issued.

The tahsildar had issued notice to Mr. Kumaraswamy after a Division Bench of the High Court, acting on a contempt of court petition, had recently questioned the government’s inaction even after giving an undertaking to the High Court, in a PIL petition, in 2020 on implementing the Lokayukta’s 2014 recommendation for holding a detailed enquiry and survey of lands in Kethagahanalli on the allegation of illegal grant of government lands and occupation.

Meanwhile, it was pointed out in Mr. Kumaraswamy’s petition that he was not named as party in the contempt of court proceedings, and that he had on March 22 moved the Supreme Court challenging the contempt proceedings.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.