BENGALURU: With the state cabinet passing a resolution on Thursday advising Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot to withdraw the notice issued to CM Siddaramaiah over the alleged irregularities in allotment of sites by MUDA, the conflict between the state government and the Raj Bhavan has just begun, according to political analysts.
This conflict may also have constitutional and legal ramifications, the analysts said.
The issue may not die down anytime soon with the CM and his cabinet colleagues alleging political vendetta behind the governor’s move and the BJP-JDS alliance firm on taking out a padayatra from Bengaluru to Mysuru after both Houses were adjourned sine die a few days ago, they said.
It became a hot topic of debate at the national-level with Siddaramaiah skipping the cabinet meeting held to pass the resolution. It was passed at a time when the governor was weighing options to allow the CM’s prosecution in the alleged irregularities of allotment of 14 sites to his wife Parvathy. A petition in this regard was submitted recently to the governor by activist TJ Abraham.
The resolution has come as a relief to Siddaramaiah and his political and legal advisors as the governor cannot take a decision without consulting the Council of Ministers, the analysts said. In 2011, the then governor Hansraj Bhardwaj gave consent to prosecute the then chief minister BS Yediyurappa on a complaint by advocates KN Balaraj and Sirajin Bhasha. An FIR was filed against Yediyurappa and he was sent to prison, Abraham told The New Indian Express.
He said the resolution passed by the cabinet will not have any impact on his petition. He will meet the governor again on Monday to seek permission to prosecute Siddaramaiah. He claimed that he had explained to the governor about the “misdeeds” of Siddaramaiah.
“The CM’s wife got the sites allotted by MUDA during the BJP rule in 2021 because of Siddaramaiah’s influence. I have submitted all documents related to it,” he claimed.
But Siddaramaiah’s legal experts disputed Abraham’s claims and said Yediyurappa ignored the officials’ notes and signed documents denotifying 20 acres of land. But Siddaramaiah did not sign any document with regard to the allotment of sites to his wife in Mysuru by MUDA, they said.
“Siddaramaiah, instead of going against the governor, should have replied to the notice as the complaint against him is not maintainable.
The cabinet can advise the governor on issues related to legislation. But the issue of notice to Siddaramaiah is a legal procedure, for which he should have replied,” said a constitutional expert.
What’s in Governor’s showcause notice...
Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot received a request from activist TJ Abraham on July 26, 2024, seek-ing sanction for prosecution aga-inst CM Siddaramaiah— in conn-ection with the alleged irregula-rities in the MUDA site allotm-ent— for offences under Sections 7, 9, 11, 12 & 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 59, 61, 62, 201, 227, 228, 229, 239, 314, 316(5), 318(1)(2)(3), 319, 322, 324, 324(1)(2)(3), 335, 336, 338 & 340 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and other applicable provisions of law in the interest of enforcing probity in life and service of Public Servants and upholding the law of land. The petition addendum with a circular from the High Cou-rt of Karnataka and an office ord-er from the Central Vigilance Commission. The Governor noted that the allegations are of serious nature and prima facie seems plausible. The Governor also noti-ced that a complaint has already been filed in the Lokayukta Police Station in Mysuru by the petit-ioner on July 18, 2024. He further said that request of the petitioner needs to be processed as per provisions of Sections 17(A) & 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 218 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and considering the guidelines in circular dated 23-09-2023 on the basis of various judgements including that of the High Court and Supreme Court. “Therefore, I direct you to submit your reply on the allegations levied against you within seven days with supporting documents as to why permission for prosecution should not be granted against you to the petitioner,” the Governor questioned the CM.
‘Guv cannot sanction prosecution unless Cabinet advises’
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s legal adviser and MLA A S Ponnanna here on Thursday took a dig at Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot for issuing the showcause notice to the CM. “As per Article 163 of the Constitution, the Governor should act on the advise of the Cabinet. We are confident that the Governor will take a decision as per the decision taken by the council of ministers,” he said. Legal experts, however, said the Cabinet or the council of ministers can give their advise, but the Governor has the discretionary power to either accept or reject the same. Now, in the MUDA case, the Governor may reject the council of ministers’ resolution and sanction prosecution against the CM, they added.