BENGALURU: IN a relief to Union Minister of Steel and Heavy Industries HD Kumaraswamy, the Karnataka High Court on Thursday stayed the order issued by the State Government constituting the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the dispute over the ownership of certain parcels of land owned by him at Kethaganahalli in Ramanagara and also the summons issued by the SIT to him.
Hearing the petition filed by the JDS leader challenging the legality of the order constituting the SIT and also the summons issued to him, Justice ES Indiresh passed the interim order of stay till the next date of hearing and issued notice to the Principal Secretary of the Revenue Department and the tahsildar of Ramanagara taluk. The court observed that prima facie, there appears to be no formal notification issued pursuant to the government order forming SIT.
The tahsildar issued a summons dated May 29, 2025, under Section 28 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, following the constitution of SIT headed by the Regional Commissioner of Bengaluru Division by way of issuing the order dated January 28, 2025, by the Revenue Department.
Stating that he is the absolute owner of the land in question, Kumaraswamy contended that he acquired the said agricultural land in 1985 under different sale deeds for a valuable sale consideration and revenue entries stand in his name.
However, the tahsildar of Ramanagara intimated to him in March 2025 that a resurvey would be conducted on land bearing Sy. No.7 and 8 which are part of the land owned by him. This notice was stayed by the HC while hearing his petition challenging the amendment to Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.
Proceedings, however, were initiated against him pursuant to the constitution of the SIT under Section 195 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and Section 8 of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act. But there is no notification issued by the State Government in this regard. Therefore, the order issued constituting SIT is unsustainable, as the notification is mandatory as per the provisions under which the SIT was constituted, Kumaraswamy’s counsel argued.