After hearing brief arguments of the advocate appearing for Wadiyar, a bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat commented: ''It is not the way to go after him.''
The court asked the state government to dispose of the applications of Wadiyar or of any tenant of the palace pending with it within one month for commercial use. Karnataka government advocate Sanjay Hegde submitted that the former ruler has opened a stud farm and a school and that he rents out the place for marriages on commercial basis in violation of the agreement. ''How does it violate the agreement? How is it affecting you?'' the court asked.
Wadiyar had claimed that the Central government had agreed that the Bangalore palace, the Mysore palace and other properties would belong to the descendants of the maharajah at the time of merger of Mysore state with the Union of India.
“In the year 1994, the Janata Dal government, which was in power, with the political motive of harassing the appellant who belongs to the Congress and was a member of Parliament, introduced the Bangalore Palace Acquisition and transfer Bill, 1996, to take over the sprawling 462-acre premises in the heart of the city,” said the affidavit of Wadiyar. While the Karnataka High Court upheld the acquisition of the palace, it permitted the royal family to rent out parts of the palace after seeking permission from the State government.
Matter before SC
Wadiyar sought the permission of the apex court to organise commercial events in the Bangalore palace till the final disposal of the case. The Wadiyars have also challenged the validity of the Act claiming that the property belonged to them.
The Karnataka government has approached the SC for restraining the royal family from renting out the palace for a hotel, the premises for exhibitions, entertainment activities, wedding parties, schools and hospitals and using the premises as a storage place for sand, fruits and other perishable items. Hegde said a nine-judge bench would have to hear the main issue of acquisition of the palace by the State and that it was pending before the court.
