Karnataka govt transfers BDA commissioner as SC frowns upon housing plot allotment to home minister, others

Gowda was pulled up by the Supreme Court on August 25 for violation of Supreme Court norms that say plots in residential layouts already developed by the BDA can be allotted only through public auction.

Several persons, including the state home minister, were beneficiaries of allotment of BDA sites after existing allotments were cancelled and reallotment was done. The home minister was allotted a plot in the posh north Bengaluru RMV Extension area, where a number of political leaders reside, in place of a site he was earlier allotted in south-east Bengaluru.

Former Karnataka Administrative Services officer K Mathai, who is a leader of AAP in Bengaluru, has lodged a complaint before the Karnataka Lokayukta over the alleged acts of corruption and maladministration since the Supreme Court pulled up the BDA on August 25.

The complaint to the Lokayukta reads, “Araga Jnanendra, home minister, Government of Karnataka has exerted undue influence on Sri Rajesh Gowda, IAS, Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, and has got allotted G category sites to himself and to three others against Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated October 26, 2021, and other orders.”

The Supreme Court order of October 26, 2021 said that sites formed in developed layouts must be allotted only through public auction but BDA has allotted sites in RMV IInd Stage to Araga Jnanendra and three others in place of sites allotted earlier in the HSR Layout, states the civil complaint lodged with the Karnataka Lokayukta.

The complaint refers to oral observations made by a bench of Justices Abdul Nazeer and Sanjiv Khanna in the Supreme Court on Thursday where the apex court reportedly said Gowda cannot continue in his position on account of the allotments to the home minister and others in violation of the BDA rules.

The Supreme Court has been looking at the land acquisition for the Shivaram Karanth Layout being developed by the BDA. In an order on October 26, 2021, the bench said the BDA, which is developing layouts through its own resources, must auction sites in layouts that are already developed.

“It is true that for the formation of the Layout, BDA has to incur huge expenses. It is not disputed that the BDA has been taking possession of the lands vested in it in the developed layouts. There is no bar for the BDA to form the sites in these recovered lands subject to the land use indicated in the approved layout plan and dispose of by public auction,” the apex court said.

“Needless to say, the sites formed in these lands, both intermediary and corner sites or any other intermediary sites in the developed layouts have to be disposed of only by public auction. Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 are not applicable to the sites formed in the recovered properties or the intermediary sites in the developed layouts. These Rules are applicable only to the new layouts formed by the BDA,” the apex court said.

On August 11, the BDA informed the SC that it has allotted “96 sites in different layouts by way of alternative sites after the order dated 26.10.2021”.

“BDA is directed to furnish in a tabular form the names and addresses of such allottees, the description and the layout in which the previous sites held by these allottees for which alternative sites have been allotted, description and the layout in which the alternative sites have been allotted, nature of allotment of previously held sites, whether possession was delivered to the allottees of the previous sites, the reasons for allotting alternative sites, the particulars of sale deeds executed in favor of the allottees with date, and other relevant description, and copies of the sale deeds of the allottees, within a period of ten days,” the Supreme Court had ordered on August 11.

On Thursday, the apex court, in oral observations, reportedly took the BDA to task for allotments made to the home minister and others in violation of the October 26, 2021 order.

In its orders on Thursday, the Supreme Court directed the Justice A V Chandrashekhar committee (which is assisting the court in the matter) to examine records pertaining to the 96 sites allotted after the October 26, 2021 order of the court, and to provide a report in this regard.

“We have also perused the Affidavits dated 19.08.2022 and 22.08.2022 of the Commissioner, BDA, filed in terms of para 6 of this Court’s Order dated 11.08.2022. We request the Justice A.V. Chandrashekar Committee to examine the contents of these Affidavits with reference to the original records maintained by the BDA and furnish a report to this Court as expeditiously as possible. The Commissioner, BDA, is directed to furnish copies of the aforesaid Affidavits along with Annexures and the relevant records to the Justice A.V. Chandrashekar Committee forthwith,” the apex court said before posting the matter for hearing on September 8.