A troubling dispute in Mallur village of Byadgi taluk (Haveri district) has raised serious questions about fairness and accountability in the handling of public institutions built on donated land. Veerappa Kulkarni, from the Hindu donor family, alleged that land beyond the donated portion was occupied during the construction of a government Urdu primary school and demanded that the excess encroached land be returned. As per Prajavani reports, when their grievance allegedly remained unresolved, the landowner locked the school, leaving staff and children distressed and forced to sit in the heat for over two hours.
According to the donor family, the original donation dates back to 2005, when Shankrappa Kulkarni donated 5 guntas specifically for the school. However, the family claims that the construction ended up occupying around 15 guntas, far beyond what was willingly donated. If true, this is not a minor boundary issue; it amounts to a breach of trust against a citizen who supported public education, and it sets a dangerous precedent: donate in good faith, and you may still lose more than you gave.
What makes the situation more serious is that the matter has been in court for nearly 10 years, indicating that the dispute is not new and has not been resolved through a clear, transparent process. In such cases, the government has a responsibility to ensure that public projects are built strictly within legally acquired land and that donors are not punished for their generosity. When land is taken beyond consent, whether by negligence or overreach, it becomes injustice.
Officials, including Tahsildar Chandrashekhar Nayak and BEO S. G. Koti, reportedly reached the spot, appealed to open the lock, and attempted a compromise through mediation by villagers and police. But citizens will ask: Is requesting the lock to be opened enough? If the allegation is that extra land was occupied, then the government must answer the real question: who measured the land, who approved the construction footprint, and why was the donor’s boundary not respected?
Is it fair? Fairness cannot mean only keeping the school running while the donor’s claim is ignored. A government school, Urdu or Kannada, must function, yes. But justice cannot be one-sided. If the state benefits from a Hindu donor’s contribution, the state must also protect that donor’s rights with equal seriousness. The correct and fair path is simple: official survey, documented measurement, public record verification, and lawful correction, either returning the excess land (if encroachment is proven) or publicly clarifying boundaries (if the allegation is false), instead of letting the dispute rot for years.
Land encroachment and land jihad in Karnataka are not new; they have been happening for many years. The Mallur case raises a serious question: is this another instance of deliberate land grabbing under political protection? If a donor gave only 5 guntas and more land was occupied during construction, that is a grave injustice and must not be brushed aside as a dispute to be settled through pressure or token mediation. Who approved the extra construction, and who benefited from it? Only a transparent investigation, an official land survey, verified records, and clear accountability can reveal the truth and restore public trust.
Similar controversies have been reported earlier in Bengaluru as well. In one such case, an alleged encroachment was flagged at the Kadugodi plantation near Bidarahalli in Bengaluru East Taluk, where LRPF (Legal Rights Protection Forum) submitted a written complaint to the concerned authorities stating that religious structures were erected at the site without approval/permission from the Bengaluru Municipal Corporation. Incidents like these reinforce a hard lesson: land disputes and boundary expansion are not rare, and once public bodies take possession, ordinary citizens often struggle for years to get redress.
