<p>Mysuru: RTI activist and complainant Snehamayi Krishna who has registered a complaint against Chief Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/siddaramaiah">Siddaramaiah</a>, in the alleged Mysuru Urban Development Authority (<a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/muda">MUDA</a>) scam, has lodged a fresh complaint with the Lokayukta Superintendent of Police (SP), in Mysuru, on Friday.</p><p>He suspected a few lapses in the process of the withdrawal of 14 sites, earlier allotted to B M Pravathi, Siddaramaiah’s wife on 50:50 compensatory basis, by MUDA. Parvathi is the second accused in the case filed by Lokayukta on September 27, 2024, following a direction of the a special court in Bengaluru for cases involving elected representatives on September 25, 2024.</p> .Karnataka High Court extends time for Lokayukta police to file probe report till January 28 in MUDA case.<p>As per earlier complaint of Krishna, Devaraju sold the land to B M Mallikarjuna Swamy on August 25, 2004. It was converted from agricultural land to non-agriculture land. On October 6, 2010, Mallikarjuna Swamy gifted the land to his sister, Parvathi. </p><p>She submitted representations to MUDA, from 2014, seeking compensation for the said land acquired by MUDA. On December 12, 2021, the then MUDA Commissioner D B Natesh allotted 14 sites on an alternative developed area on a 50:50 ratio. In the wake of the Lokayukta and ED cases and subsequent developments, Parvathi returned all the 14 sites to MUDA on October 3.</p> .<p>Krishna has urged the Lokayukta to probe the case on the basis of his suspicions and inquire the special sub-registrar in the MUDA office and also Parvathi, in this connection.</p><p>“Whose house is the address mentioned by the sub-registrar in the application for the private registration, to withdraw the sites? Why did not Parvathi go to the sub-registrar’s office, instead summoning the sub-registrar to the mentioned address. </p><p>"Why was the address of the official residence of the CM mentioned in the registration documents, instead of the permanent address in the Aadhar card of Parvathi? Who prepared the withdrawal registration papers, Parvathi or MUDA officials? How could the registration be done, when the address in the Aadhar card did not match?” are the questions posed by Krishna.</p>
<p>Mysuru: RTI activist and complainant Snehamayi Krishna who has registered a complaint against Chief Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/siddaramaiah">Siddaramaiah</a>, in the alleged Mysuru Urban Development Authority (<a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/muda">MUDA</a>) scam, has lodged a fresh complaint with the Lokayukta Superintendent of Police (SP), in Mysuru, on Friday.</p><p>He suspected a few lapses in the process of the withdrawal of 14 sites, earlier allotted to B M Pravathi, Siddaramaiah’s wife on 50:50 compensatory basis, by MUDA. Parvathi is the second accused in the case filed by Lokayukta on September 27, 2024, following a direction of the a special court in Bengaluru for cases involving elected representatives on September 25, 2024.</p> .Karnataka High Court extends time for Lokayukta police to file probe report till January 28 in MUDA case.<p>As per earlier complaint of Krishna, Devaraju sold the land to B M Mallikarjuna Swamy on August 25, 2004. It was converted from agricultural land to non-agriculture land. On October 6, 2010, Mallikarjuna Swamy gifted the land to his sister, Parvathi. </p><p>She submitted representations to MUDA, from 2014, seeking compensation for the said land acquired by MUDA. On December 12, 2021, the then MUDA Commissioner D B Natesh allotted 14 sites on an alternative developed area on a 50:50 ratio. In the wake of the Lokayukta and ED cases and subsequent developments, Parvathi returned all the 14 sites to MUDA on October 3.</p> .<p>Krishna has urged the Lokayukta to probe the case on the basis of his suspicions and inquire the special sub-registrar in the MUDA office and also Parvathi, in this connection.</p><p>“Whose house is the address mentioned by the sub-registrar in the application for the private registration, to withdraw the sites? Why did not Parvathi go to the sub-registrar’s office, instead summoning the sub-registrar to the mentioned address. </p><p>"Why was the address of the official residence of the CM mentioned in the registration documents, instead of the permanent address in the Aadhar card of Parvathi? Who prepared the withdrawal registration papers, Parvathi or MUDA officials? How could the registration be done, when the address in the Aadhar card did not match?” are the questions posed by Krishna.</p>