Disposed

Sri Safeer Ahmed v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Jan 2022WP/4239/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227, the High Court refused to quash an order of dispossession. Instead, it permitted petitioners to seek regularization of their unauthorized occupancy within four weeks, stipulated a three-month limit for the authorities to consider the representation, and maintained the status quo.

What did the court decide?

Permission to make representations for regularization; respondents to consider within three months; status quo maintained.

Sri Safeer Ahmed Vs the State of Karnataka — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.4239 OF 2016 (GM-WAKF)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SAFEER AHMED

¶9

S/O LATE BABAJAAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶10

SMT. NAGAMMA W/O RAMASWAMY AGEDA BOUT 47 YEARS, R/O HALLEMAGGE, HEGGADEVANAKOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶11

SMT. AKTHARUNNISA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS,

¶12

3(a) SMT. FARIDABHANU, D/O LATE AKTHARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶13

3(b) SMT. YASHMINTAJ D/O LATE AKTHARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶14

3(c) SRI.KHAZI MOHAMMED S/O LATE AKTHARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

¶15

3(d) SRI.MOHAMMED GIYAHULLA S/O LATE AKTHARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,

¶16

PETITIONERS NO.3(b) TO 3(d) REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER, PETITIONER NO.3(a) SMT.FARIDABHANU,

¶17

¶18

R/0F ANTHARASANTEH VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK,

¶19

MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶20

SMT. JAINABHI W/O PASHASAB, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶21

SMT. SAKAMMA W/O LATE PUTTEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶22

SMT. MEHARUNNISA W/O YAKUBSAHEB, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK,

¶23

MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶24

SRI. MOHAMMED YUSUF SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.,

¶25

7(a) SRI.MOHAMMED SADIQ, S/O LATE MOHAMMED YUSUF, AGED ABOFUT 43 YEARS,

¶26

7(b) SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ S/O LATE MOHAMMED YUSUF, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶27

7(c) SRI.MOHAMMED ERSHAD S/O LATE MOHAMMED YUSUF, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶28

7(d) SRI.ABJAL PHASHA D/O LATE MOHAMMED YUSUF, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

¶29

7(e) SRI.ABU TAHIR S/O LATE MOHAMMED YUSUF, AGED ABUT 28 YEARS,

¶30

¶31

7(f) SMT. NOOR FATHIMA D/O LATE MOHAMMED YUSUF,

¶32

AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,

¶33

PET NO.7(B) TO 7(F) ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER PET NO.7(A) MOHAMMED SADIQ R/O ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶34

SRI.A.R.ABDUL HAFEEZ S/O ABDUL RAHIM, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.163, ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶35

SRI.MANJUNATH S/O SANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.4/A, 6TH MAIN ROAD, 8TH CROSS, BRIDAWAN EXTENSION, 2ND STAGE, MYSORE-570020.

¶36

…PETITIONERS

¶37

(BY SRI.MURTHY.D.L, ADVOCATE)

¶38

AND:

¶39

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.

¶40

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HUNSUR SUB-DIVISION, HUNSUR-571105 MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶41

THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND INQUIRY OFFICER, KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS, BANGALORE

¶42

MASJID AND KHABARSTHAN ANTHARASANTHE VILLAGE,

¶43

¶44

H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571114.

¶45

…RESPONDENTS

¶46

(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2 SMT.S.R.ANURADHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R4-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶47

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN ENQUIRY NO.29/MYE/06, DT.5.4.2007, ON THE FILE OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE ADDL. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS, BANGALORE AT ANNX-J; QUASH THE ORDER DT.9.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE PETITIONERS DISPOSSESSING THEM FROM THE LAND IN QUESTION VIDE ANNX-G TO G3 AND ETC.

¶48

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

¶49

ORDER

¶50

Regardless of the pleading and prayers, the grievance of

¶51

the petitioners is as to the threat of their dispossession from the properties which they claim to have occupied unauthorizedly. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners vehemently submits that they have been in the settled possession of the properties, may be after gaining entry unathorizedly and therefore, they cannot be

¶52

¶53

dispossessed without due procedure of law as held by Division the Bench of this Court in PATIL EXHIBITORS (P) LTD VS. CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BANGALORE, ILR 1985 KAR 3700.

¶54

Learned AGA appearing for the official

¶55

respondents opposes the writ petition contending that the remedy of the kind cannot be sought for in writ jurisdiction since disputed facts are involved and therefore, the petitioners should be relegated to Civil Court; having so opposed, now he fairly agrees with the suggestion of this Court that if petitioners make an appropriate representation seeking regularization of their occupancy, the same be considered by the answering respondents in accordance with law and in a time bound manner; this is appreciable.

¶56

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is

¶57

disposed off permitting the petitioners to make appropriate representations to the jurisdictional authorities seeking regularization of their unauthorized occupation within four weeks; should such representations be made, the answering respondent/s shall consider the same in accordance with law

¶58

¶59

and within an outer limit of three months; till that happens,

¶60

status-quo shall be maintained by both the sides.

¶61

All contentions are kept open.

¶62

Costs made easy.

¶63

Sd/JUDGE

¶64

Sri Safeer Ahmed v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Safeer Ahmed v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Doddahobalaiah Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Yogesh v R Vs the Tribunal of Maintenance and

Sri Narasimhamurthy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Raghu Vs the State of Karnataka

Syed Moinuddin Vs the Chief General Manager

Legal Metrology License Holders Association Vs the Controller of Legal Metrology in Karnataka