The stir has increased after ED registered a case against Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. CM’s wife Parvati has written a letter to MUDA asking it to surrender the 14 plots allotted to them. She wrote in the letter, ‘I want to cancel the 14 plots handed over in my favor by the Mysore Urban Development Authority and return the compensation plot. I am also handing over the possession of these plots back to Mysore Urban Development. Please take immediate action in this regard.
Taking cognizance of Lokayukta’s FIR, ED has registered a money laundering case against Siddaramaiah, his wife and some others in the MUDA case. Sources said the federal agency has filed an enforcement case information report (CIR) against the chief minister and others. ED has invoked sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against Siddaramaiah. ECIR is similar to a police FIR. As per procedure, the ED has the right to summon the accused for questioning and even attach their assets during the investigation.
Siddaramaiah refuses to resign
There has been no reaction on this from the Chief Minister or any Congress leader. However, Siddaramaiah had last week said that he was being targeted in the MUDA case because the opposition was scared of him. He also said that this is the first such political case against him. He also reiterated that he would not resign even after the court ordered a probe against him in the case, as he had done no wrong. He said he would fight the case legally. The Mysuru-based Lokayukta police establishment has named Siddaramaiah, his wife BM Parvathi, brother-in-law Mallikarjuna Swamy and Devaraju in the FIR registered on September 27. Swami had purchased the land from Devaraju and gifted it to Parvati.
What is this MUDA scam case after all?
It is alleged that the plots allotted to Siddaramaiah’s wife BM Parvathi as compensation in a posh area of Mysuru were priced much higher than the land acquired by the MUDA. The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvati in the ratio of 50:50 in exchange for her 3.16-acre land, where she had developed residential layouts. Under this controversial scheme, MUDA had allotted 50 per cent of developed land to people whose undeveloped land was taken over to develop residential layouts. It was alleged that Parvati had no legal right on 3.16 acres of land situated in survey number 464 of Kasare village of Kasaba Hobli in Mysuru taluk.
(with agency input)
