Dismissed

Sri K M Byra Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Sept 2021WP/10529/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five writ petitions under Article 226 challenging the removal of encroachment under the Karnataka Forest Act were disposed of by the Court on receipt of a written assurance by the Learned HCGP that no coercive action would be taken until the order under Section 64A(1) was passed.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed of on assurance of no coercive action pending statutory order under Section 64A(1). Contentions kept open.

Sri K M Byra Reddy Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.10505 OF 2020 (GM - FOR) C/W

¶7

WRIT PETITION NOS.10526 OF 2020, 10528 OF 2020, 10529 OF 2020 AND 10537 OF 2020 (GM - FOR)

¶8

IN W.P.NO.10505/2020

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. S. VENKATASHAMY, S/O LATE SONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT CHIKKAANKDANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 114.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN N.K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE

¶20

¶21

RESPONDENTS NOT TO TAKE LAW IN TO THEIR HANDS OR ENTER UPON THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER AND OR DISPOSSESS HIM FROM THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

¶22

IN W.P.NO.10526/2020

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

SRI. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, SON OF LATE PAPAIAH, R/AT CHOKKANAHALLI VILLAGE, BAAGLUR POST, BENGALURU.

¶25

…PETITIONER

¶26

(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN N.K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE)

¶27

AND:

¶28

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶29

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶30

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO TAKE LAW IN TO THEIR HANDS OR ENTER UPON THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER AND OR DISPOSSESSING HIM FROM THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

¶34

¶35

IN W.P.NO.10528/2020

¶36

BETWEEN:

¶37

BENNY FRANCIS, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO, MEKKUTUKULAM, MALLAPPA LAYOUT, ST.VINCENT PALLOTTI SCHOOL, PRAKRUTHI TOWNSHIP, HORAMAVU AGARA, BANGALORE.

¶38

…PETITIONER

¶39

(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN N.K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE)

¶40

AND:

¶41

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM,

¶42

BANGALORE - 03.

¶43

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶44

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶45

…RESPONDENTS

¶46

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶47

¶48

IN W.P.NO.10529/2020

¶49

BETWEEN:

¶50

SRI.K.M.BYRA REDDY, S/O SRI.MUNISWAMY ALIAS PEDDAPPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT KIRUVARA VILLAGE,

¶51

¶52

J.THIMMASANDRA POST, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.

¶53

…PETITIONER

¶54

(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN N.K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE)

¶55

AND:

¶56

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶57

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶58

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶59

…RESPONDENTS

¶60

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶61

¶62

IN W.P.NO.10537/2020

¶63

BETWEEN:

¶64

DAYANAND N., AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O NAGABUSHAN RAO, NO.70/2, 6TH MAIN, 9TH CROSS, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 032.

¶65

…PETITIONER

¶66

(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN N.K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE)

¶67

¶68

AND:

¶69

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM,

¶70

BANGALORE - 03.

¶71

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 03.

¶72

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶73

…RESPONDENTS

¶74

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

¶75

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TAKING LAW IN TO THEIR HANDS TO ENTER UPON THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER AND OR DISPOSSESSING HIM FROM THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

¶76

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶77

COMMON ORDER

¶78

The short grievance of the petitioner is that he has apprehension of being removed from the subject land while the proceedings under Section 64A(1) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 for the removal of encroachment are still pending.

¶79

Learned HCGP Smt. Rashmi Patel having accepted

¶80

the notice for the respondents opposes the writ petitions contending that the ventilated apprehension of the petitioner

¶81

¶82

as to his abrupt removal is unfounded; she also fairly submits that till after the order is made under the provisions of Section 64A(1) of the Act, no coercive action would be taken against the petitioner. This assurance of the respondents should allay petitioner's apprehension.

¶83

In the above circumstances, keeping assurance of the

¶84

respondents on record petitions are disposed off.

¶85

All contentions are kept open.

¶86

Sd/JUDGE

¶87

DS/GRD

Sri K M Byra Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri K M Byra Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.M.S.a.Aleem Vs Sri. Rajappa

Sri H Gopalappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Lokesh Vs Sri Somanna

M S Jagannath Vs State of Karnataka

Mr.H Channe Gowda Vs Authorized Officer

K N Chandraprabha Vs State of Karnataka