Disposed

Sree Sree Rama Seva Mandali v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Mar 2023WP/29109/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In W.P. Nos. 29109/2016 and 41151/2019, the High Court of Karnataka disposed of petitions challenging proceedings under the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act and the constitutionality of the Act. Relying on a co-ordinate bench order regarding issues involved, the Court held the petitions to be infructuous and devoid of merits, disposing them accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions and accompanying applications were disposed of as having become infructuous.

Sree Sree Rama Seva Mandali Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^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

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 29109 OF 2016 (GM-RES) C/W

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 41151 OF 2019 (KLGP)

¶11

IN W.P.29109/2016

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

Digitally signed by D K BHASKAR Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SREE SREE RAMA SEVA MANDALI A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY A M NARAYANASWAMY RAJU S/O LATE MUNISWAMY RAJU AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/A MARENAHALLI VILLAGE JAYANAGAR, 5^TH BLOCK BENGALURU – 560042.

¶15

…PETITIONER

¶16

(BY SRI. PRAMOD – ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SARAVANA S - ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PLANNING , PROGRAMME, MONITORING

¶19

2 - WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶20

AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT M S BUILDINGS AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

¶21

BENGALURU – 560001.

¶22

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU – 560001.

¶23

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU – 560001.

¶24

TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560001.

¶25

COMMISISONER BBMP

¶26

BENGALURU – 560002.

¶27

JOINT COMMISSIONER (SOUTH) BBMP

¶28

BENGALURU – 560002.

¶29

…RESPONDENTS

¶30

(BY SRI. N. KUMAR – AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4; SRI. KEMPANNA – ADVOCATE FOR R-5 & R-6)

¶31

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO: A) QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R-1 DTD: 14.01.2016 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-Q; B) QUASH THE COMMUNICATION OF THE R-2 DTD: 08.03.2016 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-R; C) QUASH ANNEXURE-S THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE R-3 DTD: 24.03.2016; D) QUASH ANNEXURE-T ISSUED BY THE R-1 DTD:26.03.2016 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-T; E)QUASH ANNEXURE-V THE DIRECTIONS OF THE R-3 DTD: 07.04.2016.

¶32

¶33

WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶34

IN W.P.41151/2019

¶35

BETWEEN:

¶36

SREE RAMA SEVAMANDALI A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960 REPT. BY ITS SECRETARY A M NARAANASWAMY RAJU MARENAHALLI VILLAGE JAYANAGAR 5TH BLOCK BENGALURU-560041.

¶37

SRI A M NARAYANASWAMY RAJU S/O LATE MUNISWAMY RAJ AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS SREE RAMA SEVA MANDALI MARENAHALLI VILLAGE JAYANAGAR 5TH BLOCK BENGALURU-560041.

¶38

SRI BADRI NARAYAN S/O RAMACHANDRA BHAT AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS SREE RAMA SEVA MANDALI MARENAHALLI VILLAGE JAYANAGAR 5TH BLOCK BENGALURU-560041.

¶39

…PETITIONERS

¶40

(BY SRI. PRAMOD – ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SARAVANA S - ADVOCATE)

¶41

AND:

¶42

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BENGALURU-560001.

¶43

…RESPONDENT

¶44

(BY SRI. N. KUMAR - AGA)

¶45

4 - WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶46

THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO: A) DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; B) QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING COURT IN PROCEEDINGS ORDER DATED.23.01.2019, ANNEXURE-W AND PROCEEDINGS VIDE ORDER DATED 13.03.2018, ANNEXURE-Y.

¶47

THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, K. SOMASHEKAR .J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

In W.P.No.41151/2019 the petitioners are seeking to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the proceedings before the Land Grabbing Court in proceedings No.LGC(S) No.353/2016 dated 23.01.2019 vide Annexure-W and proceedings in No.LGC(S) No.352/2016 vide order dated 13.03.2018 vide AnnexureY. Further, seeking intervention of this Court to declare the provisions of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act as unconstitutional and ultra vires of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India.

¶50

5 - WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶51

In the synopsis of the writ petition it is stated that

¶52

the property bearing Sy.No.37 of Marenahalli Village, Bangalore South taluk measuring 34 Guntas which was a government land and vide order dated 31.12.1968 the Government had granted seven guntas for the purpose of construction of Rama Mandir. Thereafter temple has been constructed and the temple has been in existence from past 42 years and small community centre had earlier been constructed after obtaining permission from the Sarakki Group Panchayath in the year 1969 itself. This synopsis also indicates that under the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act proceedings were undertaken behind the back of petitioner No.1 and the same was challenged before this Court in W.P.No.29109/2016 and interim order has been granted in that regard. These are all the contentions taken by the counsel for the petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition to exercise power under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

¶53

6 - WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶54

In W.P.No.29109/2016 the petitioner has sought for writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the proceedings of the first respondent dated 14.01.2016 as per AnnexureQ; to quash the communication of second respondent dated 08.03.2016 as per Annexure-R; to quash the directions issued by the third respondent dated 24.03.2016 as per Annexure-S and to quash Annexure-T issued by the first respondent dated 26.03.2016 and also to quash Annexure-V dated 07.04.2016 issued by the third respondent

¶55

Whereas learned counsel Sri Pramod is present before the Court physically and representing counsel namely Sri Saravana.S. who is on record. Learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 4 is present before the Court physically. Learned counsel Sri Kempanna for respondent Nos.5 and 6 is on record.

¶56

¶57

WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶58

Learned AGA submits that the grounds urged and

¶59

issues involved in W.P.No.41151-53/2019 have been addressed and considered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.47747/2017 dated 19.01.2021. Therefore, this writ petition does not survive for

¶60

consideration.

¶61

In W.P.No.29109/2016 learned counsel for the

¶62

appellant has filed application in I.A.2/2020 stating that the petition is filed seeking to declare that the provisions of the Land Grabbing Prohibition Act is unconstitutional and ultra – vires to Articles 14, 16, 19, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and has further prayed to stay all further proceedings pending before the Special Court in proceedings No.KLGC (S) No.353/2016 and 352/2016.

¶63

However, keeping in view the submission made by learned AGA and in terms of the order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.47747/2017 dated

¶64

8 - WP No. 29109 of 2016 C/W WP NO.41151 of 2019

¶65

19.01.2021, these writ petitions does not have any substance and being devoid of merits, are required to be disposed as having become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of as having become infructuous.

¶66

In view of disposal of the writ petitions, I.A.1/2020

¶67

and I.A.2/2020 also stands disposed of.

¶68

Sd/JUDGE

¶69

Sd/JUDGE

¶70

DKB

Sree Sree Rama Seva Mandali v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Sree Rama Seva Mandali 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Shivaling Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. v Parasmal Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr T Narayanaswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. G S Rekha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Mohammed Khan Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Tapas Ranjan Nayak Vs State of Karnataka