Bengaluru, December 27, 2025: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar on Friday responded sharply to comments made by Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan concerning recent demolition drives in Bengaluru, asserting that senior leaders from other states should refrain from interfering in Karnataka’s “internal matters.” Shivakumar described Vijayan’s remarks as “politically motivated” and emphasised that the Kerala chief minister had made his statements without understanding the facts or the local context.

The exchange follows a wave of criticism over a demolition drive carried out last week in North Bengaluru, particularly in the Fakir Colony and Waseem Layout areas. According to local authorities, over 200 houses were razed in Kogilu village, Yelahanka, which had been reported to have been illegally constructed on a dangerous quarry pit previously designated for solid waste dumping. The operation was part of routine civic enforcement and urban planning measures aimed at maintaining public safety and preventing unauthorised settlements in hazardous areas.

Pinarayi Vijayan’s Criticism

Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan had taken to Facebook to express his concern over the demolitions, terming the action as an entry of the “North Indian model of ‘bulldozer justice’” into South India. In his post, Vijayan highlighted the plight of the residents, describing the move as leaving an entire population homeless amid harsh winter conditions. He claimed that the demolition drive reflected a continuation of “aggressively anti-minority politics” seen in certain North Indian states and questioned how such actions could occur under a Congress-led government in Karnataka.

Vijayan further called on authorities to take precautions, ensure shelter for the affected families, and provide beds for those rendered homeless. His statement underscored concerns about the political optics of demolition drives and the potential humanitarian implications for residents, many of whom belong to minority communities.

DK Shivakumar’s Retort

Reacting to the Kerala CM’s comments, DK Shivakumar stressed that the site in question had been illegally occupied and was inherently unsafe, being a dangerous quarry pit used for solid waste dumping. He clarified that residents affected by the demolitions had been moved humanely and were being provided alternatives under existing housing schemes, such as the Rajiv Gandhi Awas Yojana. Shivakumar said that both he and Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah had directed local officers to submit reports on the action to ensure due process was followed.

Shivakumar emphasised that senior leaders like Vijayan must understand the reality in Bengaluru, including urban planning challenges, public safety concerns, and the need to prevent the proliferation of unauthorised settlements in hazardous areas. “The site in question is dangerous. People have been moved humanely, and we will provide alternative housing to those who are eligible,” he said.

He further criticised Vijayan’s comments as politically motivated, suggesting they were timed to coincide with elections in Kerala. “Without knowing the facts, Pinarayi should not interfere in our state’s affairs. These are political gimmicks at the time of the elections,” Shivakumar added.

Emphasis on Routine Urban Enforcement

Shivakumar sought to contextualise the demolitions as part of routine civic enforcement, not targeting any particular community. He noted that unlike cities such as Mumbai, Bengaluru does not have an extensive network of slums and the government is committed to preventing unauthorised encroachments. “No one should come and put up huts there. It is not a question of minorities or other people. We don’t want to hurt anyone, but if anyone wants land and is eligible, we will definitely provide houses,” he said.

The deputy chief minister also pointed out that the action was necessary for public safety and urban management. The demolished site, being a quarry, posed significant risks of accidents, structural collapses, and environmental hazards. The administration’s decision was therefore framed as part of ensuring safe urban living conditions and safeguarding residents from potential harm.

Political Undertones

The spat between Shivakumar and Vijayan highlights the political undercurrents in inter-state commentary on civic enforcement. Vijayan’s remarks come amid heightened political sensitivity around issues of minority rights, urban evictions, and the optics of “bulldozer justice” — a term increasingly used to describe unilateral demolition drives in several Indian cities. Shivakumar’s rebuttal, in turn, frames the narrative around legality, public safety, and humane treatment, emphasising that the demolitions were not politically or communally motivated.

Experts note that such exchanges are becoming increasingly common as political leaders from different states weigh in on issues of governance and minority rights, often coinciding with electoral cycles. While Vijayan’s criticism reflects concern for affected populations, Shivakumar’s response underscores the importance of respecting state jurisdiction and local governance processes.

Alternative Housing Measures

Authorities have reassured residents that eligible families affected by the demolition drive will be accommodated under formal housing schemes. The Rajiv Gandhi Awas Yojana remains the primary mechanism for providing alternative housing to displaced individuals. Local MLAs and district officials have been actively involved in ensuring the displaced families are relocated safely and provided with necessary support during the winter season.

Conclusion

The confrontation between DK Shivakumar and Pinarayi Vijayan over the Bengaluru bulldozer drives underscores the sensitive intersection of urban governance, minority rights, and inter-state political commentary in India. While Kerala’s chief minister raised humanitarian and political concerns, Karnataka’s deputy chief minister defended the demolitions as necessary and lawful, reiterating that all actions were carried out with due consideration for safety and alternative housing.

Shivakumar’s insistence that outsiders, even senior leaders, should not interfere in state matters highlights the ongoing tension between local governance autonomy and national political scrutiny. As urban management challenges grow in rapidly expanding cities like Bengaluru, such clashes of perspective are likely to remain part of the public discourse, particularly during politically charged periods.

---