Bengaluru, Sep 2 (IANS): The Karnataka High Court on Monday began hearing the writ petition filed by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah against Governor Thaawar Chand Gehlot, seeking interim relief in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case.

He has also sought quashing of the Governor’s order giving sanction for prosecution.

The HC is most likely to pronounce the order later in the day today and all eyes in the state’s political circles are on the development.

Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has cancelled all engagements till evening in anticipation of the verdict.

He also cancelled the visit to his native city Mysuru and special worship of goddess Chamundeshwari.

Senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for CM Siddaramaiah has placed his arguments and the Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, has also completed his arguments in favour of the Governor’s decision to permit prosecution.

Governor Gehlot has also cancelled his prior engagements, including a convocation programme in Kolar.

Senior counsel Manindar Singh had placed arguments for petitioner Snehamayi Krishna, Prabhuling Navadgi appeared for petitioner Pradeep Kumar. Ranganath Reddy submitted his arguments for petitioner TJ Abraham.

Singhvi is expected to submit rebuttals to the arguments and Mehta is also likely to make comments.

Legal experts stated that there are chances of the HC reserving the judgment as arguments and counterarguments for four days will have to be considered before the order is pronounced.

Earlier, a HC Bench, headed by Justice M Nagaprasanna, which heard the matter, stated it has to decide whether the investigation nod was needed or not, and continued its interim order for the lower court restricting it from proceeding further in the case.

The Bench observed that under Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the police are not supposed to take up an investigation without prior permission.

However, it is not necessary for the police to obtain permission themselves; anyone can approach the appropriate authorities to obtain such permission.

The court had also remarked that specific illegalities committed by CM Siddaramaiah in the MUDA case were not highlighted in the order.

Mehta had argued that the Governor was not obliged to respond to every clarification provided by the Cabinet and CM Siddaramaiah in this case. "The Governor's order clearly states his position, and not everything can be explained at this stage due to the potential for destruction of evidence," he said.

Senior counsel Manindar Singh, making submissions for one of the petitioners Snehamayi Krishna, pleaded with the court to note three figures, "Rs 3.24 lakh", "Rs 5.98 lakh" and "Rs 55 crore". When the land was acquired, the price of the land was Rs 3.24 lakh. It was sold for Rs 5.98 lakh and now the value of the land is claimed to be Rs 55 crore. In this background, there is a need for an investigation into the case by an independent agency, he said.

Senior counsel Prabhuling Navadgi had submitted that on the one hand CM claims that there are no illegalities and on the other the enquiry commission has been constituted by him.

The Governor has mentioned it and the accused under Section 17 (A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act can’t question the Governor.

Another senior counsel Ranganath Reddy argued that when CM Siddaramaiah was the Deputy Chief Minister, de-notification and land conversion was done and when the decision was made to allot alternative land on the rationing of 50:50, Siddaramaiah was the CM.

Counsel Reddy also brought to the notice of the court that CM Siddaramaiah is claiming that four petitions are pending before the Governor. The consent was given in two of the cases and another two have been sent back for clarifications.

Meanwhile, Singhvi argued that the Governor did not follow the principles of natural justice when granting probe permission against CM Siddaramaiah.

He also mentioned that the Governor did not consider the advice given by the Cabinet in this matter.