<p>Bengaluru: Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Monday welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Karnataka High Court judgment, which quashed the ED notice in the MUDA case.</p>.<p>A statement issued by the Chief Minister’s office called the ruling a step towards justice and a blow to politically motivated interference.</p>.<p>Referring to media reports, the statement read: “Supreme Court upholds judgment of the High Court quashing ED notice to Parvathi B M and Byrathi Suresh in MUDA case. SLPs dismissed. The court cautioned against making adverse remarks about ED. They stated that the matter must not be politicised. Fight your battles before the electorate. Dismissed as they find no fault in the learned single judge’s order. Justice has prevailed and ED interference has been put to an end in the MUDA case.” The MUDA (Mysuru Urban Development Authority) case involves alleged irregularities in land allotted to Parvathi, wife of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.</p>.'Why ED being used for political battles?': Supreme Court rejects plea against Siddaramaiah's wife in MUDA case .<p>In the MUDA case, it is alleged that compensatory sites were allotted to Parvathi in an upmarket area in Mysuru, which had higher property value as compared to the location of her land, which had been "acquired" by the MUDA.</p>.<p>The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvathi under a 50:50 ratio scheme in lieu of 3.16 acres of her land, where it developed a residential layout.</p>.<p>Under the controversial scheme, MUDA allotted 50 per cent of developed land to the land losers in lieu of undeveloped land acquired from them for forming residential layouts.</p>.<p>It is alleged that Parvathi had no legal title over the 3.16 acres of land at survey number 464 of Kasare village, Kasaba hobli of Mysuru taluk.</p>.<p>The Lokayukta as well as the ED are probing the matter simultaneously.</p>.<p>The Enforcement Directorate had issued notices to both under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which were later quashed by the Karnataka High Court.</p>.<p>The ED had challenged the High Court’s decision before the Supreme Court through Special Leave Petitions (SLPs). </p>
<p>Bengaluru: Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Monday welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Karnataka High Court judgment, which quashed the ED notice in the MUDA case.</p>.<p>A statement issued by the Chief Minister’s office called the ruling a step towards justice and a blow to politically motivated interference.</p>.<p>Referring to media reports, the statement read: “Supreme Court upholds judgment of the High Court quashing ED notice to Parvathi B M and Byrathi Suresh in MUDA case. SLPs dismissed. The court cautioned against making adverse remarks about ED. They stated that the matter must not be politicised. Fight your battles before the electorate. Dismissed as they find no fault in the learned single judge’s order. Justice has prevailed and ED interference has been put to an end in the MUDA case.” The MUDA (Mysuru Urban Development Authority) case involves alleged irregularities in land allotted to Parvathi, wife of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.</p>.'Why ED being used for political battles?': Supreme Court rejects plea against Siddaramaiah's wife in MUDA case .<p>In the MUDA case, it is alleged that compensatory sites were allotted to Parvathi in an upmarket area in Mysuru, which had higher property value as compared to the location of her land, which had been "acquired" by the MUDA.</p>.<p>The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvathi under a 50:50 ratio scheme in lieu of 3.16 acres of her land, where it developed a residential layout.</p>.<p>Under the controversial scheme, MUDA allotted 50 per cent of developed land to the land losers in lieu of undeveloped land acquired from them for forming residential layouts.</p>.<p>It is alleged that Parvathi had no legal title over the 3.16 acres of land at survey number 464 of Kasare village, Kasaba hobli of Mysuru taluk.</p>.<p>The Lokayukta as well as the ED are probing the matter simultaneously.</p>.<p>The Enforcement Directorate had issued notices to both under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which were later quashed by the Karnataka High Court.</p>.<p>The ED had challenged the High Court’s decision before the Supreme Court through Special Leave Petitions (SLPs). </p>