Dismissed

Bhimappa Hullappa Katari v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Mar 2023WP/15871/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the validity of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 and 2017 Regulations as unconstitutional and seeking quashing of a special court order was disposed of as infructuous since a co-ordinate Bench had already addressed the issues in a previous petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as having become infructuous.

Bhimappa Hullappa Katari Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 15871 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA WRIT PETITION NO. 15871 OF 2019 (KLGP)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

BHIMAPPA HULLAPPA KATARI AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O HULLAPPA KATARI RESIDING AT BYCHUVALLI VILLAGE HANAGAL TALUKA HAVERI DISTRICT0581104.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

Digitally signed by D K BHASKAR

¶13

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SRI. GOPAL H M.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE & PANCHAYATH RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT M.S.BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR DR.AMBEDKAR BHAVANA BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY’S.

¶17

PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GRAM PANCHAYATH BYCHAVALLI HANAGAL TALUKA HAVERI DISTRICT 581104.

¶18

PRESIDENT GRAM PANCHAYATH

¶19

¶20

WP No. 15871 of 2019

¶21

BYCHAVALLI HANAGAL TALUKA HAVERI DISTRICT 581104.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. N. KUMAR – AGA FOR R-1; R-2 AND R-3 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO: A) DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS ULTRA VIRES TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS IT VIOLATES ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; B) DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS 2017 ARE ULTRA VIRES TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS THEY VIOLATES ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; C) CONSEQUENTLY, QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2018, PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURTS, BENGALURU, IN LGC(T)NO.846/2018 (VIDE ANNEXURE-J)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, K. SOMASHEKAR .J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Learned counsel Sri Gopal H.M. for the petitioner is

¶28

on record.

¶29

¶30

WP No. 15871 of 2019

¶31

Learned AGA Sri N.Kumar for respondent No.1 is

¶32

present before the Court physically.

¶33

Though process has been served against

¶34

respondent Nos.2 and 3, but remained absent.

¶35

Whereas in this writ petition, the petitioner is praying to declare the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 is ultra vires to the Constitution of India as it violates Articles 14, 20, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. Further, to quash the order dated 19.11.2018 passed by the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Court, Bengaluru in LGC (T) No.846/2018 as per Annexure-J and for such other reliefs.

¶36

However, the issues involved in this writ petition have been addressed and considered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.47447/2017 dated 19.01.2021. Therefore, in terms of the order passed in the aforesaid petition, this writ petition does not survive for consideration. Further, we are of the opinion, that this

¶37

¶38

WP No. 15871 of 2019

¶39

writ petition does not have any substance to dwelling in detail of the materials which has been facilitated by the counsel for the petitioner in conformity with the grounds urged in this writ petition. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of as having become infructuous.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

DKB

Bhimappa Hullappa Katari v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhimappa Hullappa Katari 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri B Narayanswamy Vs M Somashekar

Sri Narayanaswamy @ Motappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. H.K. Lakshman Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Syed Munir Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri G K Sanjay Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Doddatayamma Vs the Principal Secretary