Synopsis: The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a PIL challenging the Bidadi township project, ruling that the petitioner failed to show any specific legal or statutory violations in the State’s land acquisition process. The proposed AI-powered township, which involves acquiring more than 7,481 acres of farmland, has faced continued opposition from farmers and opposition parties, despite the State’s claim that most landowners have accepted compensation.
The Karnataka High Court on Monday, 20 July, dismissed a public interest litigation challenging the contentious Greater Bengaluru Integrated Township (GBIT) project in Bidadi, in a major relief to the DK Shivakumar government.
A Division Bench held that the petitioner, advocate Rajesh Basavanna, had failed to establish any specific statutory or legal violations in the State’s land acquisition process.
The Bench observed that the Court could not sit in judgement over the administrative merits or desirability of an urban development scheme and cautioned against using the court as a forum for political debates.
‘Over 70 percent farmers are pro-acquisition’: Shivakumar
The proposed AI-powered township project aims to acquire over 7,481 acres of farmland across nine revenue villages near Bidadi. The State has already issued final notifications to acquire nearly 4,941 acres for the project.
The Chief Minister has defended the township project in the face of continued resistance from farmers on the ground and opposition parties. He has maintained that 70 percent of landowners have accepted compensation and assured residents that no villages will be relocated, nor any land will be acquired by force.
Shivakumar maintained that the Bidadi Township was not his “dream project” and said he had never claimed credit for it or even laid its foundation stone.
Earlier this month, he also announced a committee to review the project, tasked with examining the implementation of the Bidadi Township and seeking feedback on its merits and concerns. He also assured that the status of land belonging to farmers who do not wish to part with it would not be changed.