Complaint accuses Justice Nayak of violating housing society bye-laws

Complaint accuses Justice Nayak of violating housing society bye-laws

Complaint accuses Justice Nayak of violating housing society bye-laws

A complaint has been filed with the Lokayukta police against State Law Commission chairman Justice S R Nayak accusing him of violating the house building society bye-laws and the Registration Act, besides making a false statement in the sale deed and possessing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.

The complaint – submitted on Wednesday by Janaadhikaara Sangharsha Parishath (JSP), an NGO, to Additional Director General of Police (Lokayukta) Dr S Parashiva Murthy – stated that Nayak’s family possessed three sites before the allotment of a site at the Judicial Layout in Bengaluru in 2002.

Nayak was allotted a site (859/C) by the Karnataka State Judicial Department Employees’ House Building Co-operative Society at Yelahanka. The complaint stated that the society bye-law stipulated that a member should not possess a site, plot, house or a flat in his or in the name of his family members within the City corporation or the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) limits.

“When the site at the Judicial Layout was registered in the name of Justice Nayak, three properties existed in the name of his wife Shalini S Nayak. A site, measuring 2,400 sqft at HSR Layout sector-1, was allotted in 1990. Another plot measuring 4,000 sqft, along with a building measuring 10,200 sqft at 2nd block RMV Extension, was purchased and registered in 2001. There was also another vacant site measuring 2,290 sqft at Jaarakabande Kaaval in Gangamma Gudi Layout in Vidyaranyapura. Justice Nayak has clearly violated the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act’s bye-laws by already owning properties as on the date of purchase of the site at the Judicial Layout,'' Adarsh Iyer of JSP claimed.

Site purchase
The complaint further stated that Nayak had paid Rs 1.5 crore towards purchase of the site in RMV Extension through pay orders and demand drafts in 2001. This apart, as a presenter of the documents while registering the site at the Judicial Layout, Nayak has produced ‘false evidence’ by stating that the BDA had approved the layout plan.

“The layout plan was not approved by the BDA in respect to the Judicial Layout. The false statement was made with the sole intention of ensuring that the registration process was not stopped.

As a presenter and vendee, Justice Nayak has fabricated false evidence and forged the deed. Justice Nayak was a judge of the High Court from 1994 to 2007. Including the stamp duty and the registration charge, he has paid Rs 1.69 crore towards the purchase of the house in RMV Extension in 2001. It should be seen in the context of the fact that Rs 1.69 crore was a very huge sum in 2001. Hence, Justice Nayak is bound to offer a special explanation on the source of this fund,” Prakash Babu, co-president of JSP, said.