BENGALURU: The MUDA finds itself at the centre of a raging controversy over the allocation of 14 residential sites to BM Parvathi, wife of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. Allegations of favouritism, political influence and backdoor dealings seriously question the integrity of land conversion practices in the state. G Kumar Naik, who was Mysuru DC when the sites were allotted and is now Raichur MP, remains defiant. Speaking to The New Indian Express from Raichur on the phone, he dismissed allegations of wrongdoing.
“I performed my duties in strict accordance with law. I have taken no illegal decisions. As deputy commissioner of Mysuru, every action I took was legally sound. It would be preposterous to assume I made these decisions with political aspirations in mind,” Naik retorted, rejecting suggestions that his land conversion approval was a strategic move to secure an MP seat in 2024.
A Lokayukta report suggests that Naik may have acted improperly in approving the controversial land conversion. But Naik stands by his decision, claiming it was made towards the end of his tenure as DC and in line with evolving land acquisition policies.
“The Land Acquisition Act was widely criticised for being draconian, stripping farmers of their lands and handing them over to the middle class at throwaway prices. But the 2000s saw a paradigm shift. Courts recognised that farmers deserved a fair compensation,” Naik explained.
“The Supreme Court and many high courts ruled that land shouldn’t be seized for a pittance but rather at market-driven rates. The previous Union Government also revised acquisition policies between 2000 and 2012, ensuring farmers received substantial compensation.”
Naik insisted that the conversion followed legal provisions, just like many others. “The Revenue Department has strict guidelines, and I adhered to them meticulously. We verified ownership, checked for legal violations, and ensured full compliance before granting approval,” he asserted.
However, if it is considered dereliction of duty, he is ready to face any action, he said. Naik said he has not seen the Lokayukta report, but he has not done anything illegal. “The denotification has not been cancelled yet. I processed the file after reviewing it,” he said.
Naik added that he will look at the report and respond. However, critics argued that legality doesn’t necessarily mean fairness. With whispers of high-profile influence and preferential treatment gaining momentum, the big question remains: Was this just another case of law being bent to favour the powerful?