The Congress-led government in Karnataka and Raj Bhavan, presently occupied by Thaawar Chand Gehlot, a former minister in the Narendra Modi-led Union government, have been on a collision course for more than a month.
The public spat began with the Governor issuing a show-cause notice to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah over a private complaint alleging corruption in the allocation of 14 alternate sites by the Mysore Urban Development Corporation (MUDA) to his wife in lieu of 3.16 acres of land she owned which MUDA developed, reportedly without acquiring it. He eventually gave sanction for prosecution in the case.
Related Stories
Since then, the State government, the Congress, and a host of civil society and caste organisations, considered “anti-BJP”, have decried the actions as “the BJP’s efforts to destabilise an Opposition government”, calling the Governor a “puppet” of the Union government. The BJP has criticised the protests against the Governor and even petitioned the State police to book those who issue “derogatory statements” against him under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The State government has also been trying to project the Governor as partisan. On August 22, the State Cabinet recommended to the Governor to take a “quick decision” on requests for sanction for prosecution against four NDA leaders: three former BJP ministers and JD(S) leader H.D. Kumaraswamy, who is Union Minister for Heavy Industries and Steel. Of the four, Lokayukta Police have sought sanction for prosecution against Mr. Kumaraswamy and mining baron G. Janardhan Reddy and a preliminary inquiry against Shashikala Jolle and Murugesh Nirani. At least two of these requests have been pending at Raj Bhavan for more than a year.
Related Stories
Several ministers have sought to contrast this delay with how the Governor served a show-cause notice to the Chief Minister promptly on July 26, just hours after a complaint alleging corruption in MUDA was lodged against him by an activist. On August 1, the Cabinet advised the Governor to withdraw the notice, which also highlighted this contrast. Mr. Siddaramaiah’s petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging sanction for prosecution also argues that the move “reflects a clear bias and extraneous influence. This selective treatment and the apparent political motivations behind the Governor’s actions are indicative of legal mala fides.” Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar has announced a ‘Raj Bhavan Chalo’ march on August 31, demanding that the Governor give sanction for prosecution against the NDA leaders too.
The State government has also pointed out that the Governor has sent back 11 Bills seeking clarification since January. Six of these were sent back in August alone, after the tug of war between the State government and Raj Bhavan escalated. Fifteen Congress legislators issued a joint statement in which they called the Governor’s decisions “politically motivated” and said that he was “acting like an Opposition leader”. Mr. Shivakumar asked, “If the Governor takes decisions based on what suits the BJP, why do we need governments in a democracy?”
Mr. Gehlot has remained resolutely silent and has not responded to any of these allegations till date.
This is not the first time that the State government and Raj Bhavan are in conflict in Karnataka. A similar situation played out in 2011 when the then Governor, Hansraj Bhardwaj, a former minister in the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, had sanctioned prosecution against the then Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa of the BJP in land de-notification cases in January that year. Mr. Yediyurappa was arrested in the Rachenahalli denotification case in October 2011 by the Lokayukta Police. In the intervening period, he resigned as Chief Minister after a Lokayukta report on illegal mining indicted him. However, in 2015, the High Court of Karnataka quashed Mr. Bharadwaj’s decision to sanction prosecution, providing relief to the former Chief Minister. Following this, all the FIRs against Mr. Yediyurappa were quashed.
Mr. Siddaramaiah has repeatedly tried to emphasise that unlike in the case of Mr. Yediyurappa, neither he nor his party were in power when the 14 sites in question were allotted to his wife by MUDA and that he was not linked to the sanctioning process.
