Wed Sep 10 05:34:28 UTC 2025: Okay, here’s a summary of the provided text and a rewrite as a news article:

**Summary:**

The Karnataka High Court has partially overturned a previous ruling that stayed a summons issued to Union Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy regarding allegations of land encroachment. The summons, issued in 2005 by a Ramanagara tahsildar, requires Kumaraswamy to address claims that he encroached on government land near his property. While the court upheld the stay on a Government Order (GO) establishing a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the encroachment, it allowed the tahsildar’s inquiry to proceed, arguing that the tahsildar has the legal authority to conduct such inquiries. The court found that staying the summons was not justifiable, and that proceeding with the inquiry would not cause irreparable harm.

**News Article:**

**Karnataka High Court Allows Land Encroachment Inquiry Against Union Minister Kumaraswamy to Proceed**

**Bengaluru, September 10, 2025** – The Karnataka High Court has cleared the way for an inquiry into allegations that Union Minister for Heavy Industries and Steel, H.D. Kumaraswamy, encroached on government land in Ramanagara taluk. A Division Bench partially overturned a previous single-judge order that had stayed a summons issued to Mr. Kumaraswamy in 2005 by the Ramanagara tahsildar.

The allegations center on claims that Mr. Kumaraswamy encroached upon government land adjoining his property in Kethaganahalli village. The initial summons required him to address these claims.

While the court upheld the stay on a Government Order (GO) issued on January 28, 2025, which established a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the alleged encroachment, it ruled that the tahsildar’s inquiry could proceed. The court found that the tahsildar possesses the legal authority under Section 28 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, to conduct such inquiries and summon individuals for questioning.

“Undisputedly, the tahsildar is empowered to take evidence on oath and to summon any person whom he considers necessary for the purpose of any inquiry which the officer is legally empowered to undertake,” the Bench observed. “There appears to be no cavil that the tahsildar has the power to conduct an inquiry.”

The State Advocate General argued that the previous order erroneously referenced Section 195 of the KLR Act and that the government had not delegated any of its powers to the SIT. The court agreed, finding no justification for staying the tahsildar’s summons.

The case is scheduled to be heard again on September 22, 2025.

Read More