Allowed

Smt Yashodamma v. the Principal Secretary

Karnataka HC23 Jul 2024WP/1077/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition challenging eviction orders under the Karnataka Forest Act. The Court quashed the orders passed by the Assistant Conservator of Forest and the Appellate Authority, noting the absence of the petitioner during spot inspection and lack of evidence linking her land to the encroached area. A joint survey was directed to be conducted in the petitioner'

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 20.05.2014 directed the 3rd respondent and the order dated 05.12.2014 by the 2nd respondent to be quashed. The 3rd respondent is directed to conduct a joint survey in the pres

Smt Yashodamma Vs the Principal Secretary — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 1077 OF 2015 (GM-FOR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT YASHODAMMA @ YASHODHA WIFE OF LATE MALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT GONAKAL VILLAGE, THOGARTI HANKAL POST, JAGARA HOBLI, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT-577 101.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. JAYAKIRTHI M C., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-1.

¶13

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY, CHIKMAGALUR CIRLCE, CHIKMAGALUR 577 101.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CHIKMAGALUR SUB DIVISION, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

¶16

THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER CHIKMAGALUR DIVISION, CHIKMAGLAUR-577 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. KEMPANNA, AAG A/W SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶21

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS REGARDING THE ORDER DATED 20.5.2014 IN FOREST CASE NO. 483/98-99 AS PER ANN-L FROM THE OFFICE OF THE R-3 AND THE ORDER DATED 5.12.2014 PASSED IN CASE NO. A1/APPEAL NO. 10/2014-15 AS PER ANNEXURE-N FROM THE OFFICE OF THE R-2 AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)

¶26

An extent of 150 acres out of 604 acres and 16 guntas in Sy.No.57 of Gonakal Village, Thogari Honkal Post, Chikkamagalur Taluk and District was handed over to the Forest Department by the Government of Mysuru on 10.08.1950.

¶27

One Muthanna filed an application seeking the grant of 75 acres of land for the cultivation of coffee in survey No.57. Accordingly, an extent of 30 acres was granted in Sy.No.57 to said Muthanna under the grant certificate dated 17.01.1970, upon receiving approval from the Forest Department.

¶28

The petitioner submits that the grant was made after obtaining approval from the Forest Department. The petitioner further asserts that the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Chikkamagaluru, on 17.04.1989, granted permission to his

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶31

predecessor to fell the trees in Sy.No.259P (Old No.57) of Gonakal Village.

¶32

An extent of 16 acres was conveyed to the petitioner under the registered sale deed dated 05.09.1989, executed by one C. M. Poovaiah, the legal representative of the original grantee.

¶33

Given the circumstances, the 3rd respondent initiated proceedings under Section 64-A(3) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (“the Act”) for evicting the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation of an extent of 28 acres of land in Sy.No.57. The 3rd respondent, after conducting an enquiry, passed the impugned order on 20.05.2014, directing the petitioner to vacate the said land. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.

¶34

The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal under Section 64-A of the Act before the 2nd respondent, which was dismissed by the impugned order dated 05.12.2014, thus confirming the order passed by the 3rd respondent.

¶35

Learned Counsel for the petitioner argues that the impugned order was passed without providing an opportunity for a hearing, rendering it unsustainable. Further, it was also averred that there is no material to substantiate that the 28 acres of land belonging to the petitioner forms a part of Sy.No.57 marked as the encroached area of forest land, and the same is hence not legally sustainable.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶38

In response, Sri. Kempanna, learned Additional Advocate General, contends that the survey map drawn under Rule 33 of the Karnataka Forest Rules does not require notice to be issued to any party and is binding on the petitioner. Therefore, respondents No.1 and 2 rightly passed their orders, which, according to him, do not warrant interference.

¶39

The arguments of both counsel are duly considered.

¶40

It is undisputed that the spot inspection was not conducted in the presence of the Petitioner to verify whether the land belonging to the petitioner constituted part of 28 acres of land of Sy.No.57 marked as being encroached in the survey map Consequently, in the absence of supporting evidence indicating that the land belonging to the petitioner constitutes part of 28 acres as encroached land, the orders issued by respondents No.2 and 3 are legally unsustainable. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

i) This writ petition is allowed.

¶43

ii) The impugned order dated 20.05.2014 passed by the 3^rd respondent in Forest Case No.483/98-99 at Annexure-L, and the impugned order dated 05.12.2014 in Case No.A1/Appeal No.10/2014 -15 passed by the 2^nd respondent at Annexure-N are hereby quashed .

¶44

¶45

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶46

iii) The 3^rd respondent is hereby directed to conduct a survey of said land in the presence of the petitioner, and upon survey, if it is found that the petitioner is in possession of the above-said 28 acres of land and if that extent of land is notified as ‘forest land’, the 3^rd respondent is directed to take immediate steps to evict the petitioner from the subject land.

¶47

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶48

¶49

¶50

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶51

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU [SMT YASHODAMMA VS. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS]

¶52

19.08.2024 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING)

¶53

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶54

ORAL ORDER ON 'FOR BEING SPOKEN TO'

¶55

The respondent No.2 is hereby directed to conduct the joint survey in Sy.No.24 with the assistance of Assistant Director of Land Records to ascertain as to whether an extent of 12 guntas of land falls in 8 acres of encroached land shown in the work plan at Annexure-R4. If it is found that 12 guntas of land falls within 8 acres of land encroached shown in the work plan, the respondent No.2 shall stake coercive actions to remove the encroachment of the area in accordance with law.

¶56

This order shall be read in Conjunction with the order dated 23.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.1077 of 2015.

¶57

The office to issue fresh copy, free of cost.

¶58

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶59

¶60

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

¶61

¶62

NC: 2024:KHC:28900 WP No. 1077 of 2015

¶63

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶64

[SMT YASHODAMMA VS. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS]

¶65

04.09.2024 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING)

¶66

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶67

ORAL ORDER ON `FOR BEING SPOKEN TO'

¶68

The respondent No.2 is hereby directed to conduct the joint survey in Sy.No.57 with the assistance of Assistant Director of Land Records to ascertain as to whether an extent of land falls in 16 acres of encroached land. If it is found that 16 acres of land is encroached within the forest area, the respondent No.2 shall take coercive action to remove the encroachment of the area in accordance with law.

¶69

This order shall be read in conjunction with the order dated 23.7.2024 passed in WP No.1077/2015.

¶70

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶71

snc

¶72

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Smt Yashodamma v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Yashodamma v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank Vs Assistant Commissioner of Police

Smt Raginiyamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. K Udyashankara Vs the State of Karnataka

Rekha M R Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri B Y Srinivas Vs the City Muncipal Council

Dr M S Praveen Hegde Vs State of Karnataka