Allowed

Sri M P Krishne Gowda v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Sept 2024WP/19223/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner granted land in Sy.No.11 had names mutated but was ordered to vacate 1 acre 20 guntas declared deemed forest land. High Court quashed both forest authority orders and directed a joint survey with Land Records officials to verify encroachment before any removal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 13.02.2024 (respondent No.2 appeal) and 26.07.2021 (respondent No.3) quashed; joint survey ordered in petitioner's presence with Assistant Director of Land Records before any evi

Sri M P Krishne Gowda Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:36445 WP No. 19223 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 19223 OF 2024 (GM-FOR)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI M P KRISHNE GOWDA S/O PUTTE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS OCC AGRICULTURIST R/AT 113 CHAMPAK NAGAR SAKLESHPUR TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT 573134

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. PRAKASH M PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT OF FORESTS M S BUILDING DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 001.

¶12

THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS HASSAN CIRCLE, HASSAN 573201.

¶13

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SAKALESHPURA SUB DIVISION SAKALESHPURA TALUK SAKALESHPURA 573134.

¶14

THE ZONAL FOREST OFFICER SAKALESHPURA ZONE SAKALESHPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 573 134.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:36445 WP No. 19223 of 2024

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY. NO.11 OF MURAGUNDA VILLAGE, NELAGALLI POST, HANUBAL HOBLI, SAKALESHPUR -TALUKA, HASSAN - DISTRICT AND ETC.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER DICTATION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner claims that an extent of land measuring 2 guntas was granted to him on 18.12.2024, and an additional 4.00 acres were granted on 21.03.2018 in Sy.No.11, located at Maragunda village, Nelagalli PO, Hanbal Hobli, Sakaleshpura Taluk, Hassan District, by the concerned Tahsildar.

¶24

Following the grant, the petitioner's name was duly mutated in the revenue records with respect to the said extents of land. The competent authority subsequently passed the impugned order, directing the petitioner to vacate an extent of 1 acre 20 guntas, which has been declared as forest land. This order was confirmed by respondent No.2 in Appeal No.2/2021-22, invoking Section 64(A) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1963"). Aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent No.3, without conducting any survey in the presence of the petitioner to verify whether the land measuring 1 acre 20

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:36445 WP No. 19223 of 2024

¶28

guntas, which is in the petitioner's possession, forms part of forest land, passed the impugned order. Therefore, the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1963.

¶29

In response, the learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the petitioner has encroached upon an extent of 1 acre 20 guntas, which forms part of forest land. Therefore, it is contended that the impugned orders passed by respondents No.2 and 3 are in conformity with the provisions of the Act, 1963, and do not warrant any interference by this Court.

¶30

The submissions of the learned counsel for both parties have been duly considered.

¶31

A perusal of the grant certificate for the 4 acres and 20 guntas of land reveals that this extent of land was indeed granted in favor of the petitioner. Subsequently, his name was mutated in the revenue records. However, the Forest Department has observed that a portion of this land constitutes part of forest land in the same survey number. The total extent of land in Sy.No.11 is 44 acres and 36 guntas, of which approximately 33 acres have been declared as deemed forest land under a notification dated 15.05.2014. The 1 acre 20 guntas of land allegedly granted to the petitioner forms part of the 33 acres of deemed forest land.

¶32

A joint survey is required to resolve this matter, as the Competent Authority alleges that the petitioner is in occupation of 1

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:36445 WP No. 19223 of 2024

¶35

acre 20 guntas of deemed forest land. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by respondents No.2 and 3 are liable to be quashed.

¶36

Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

¶37

The impugned order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the respondent No.2 in appeal No.02/2021-22 at Annexure-A and order dated 26.07.2021 passed by the respondent No.3 at Annexure-B are hereby quashed.

¶38

The respondent No.3 is hereby directed to conduct a joint survey of the land in Sy.No.11 in the presence of the petitioner with Assistance of the assistant Director of the Land Records, and to verify as to whether 1 acre 20 guntas of land in which the petitioner is in possession constitutes part of 33 acres of land which is declared deemed forest and upon survey, if it is found that the petitioner is in occupation of 1 acre 20 guntas of land which is declared as deemed forest, the respondent No.3 shall take steps forthwith to remove the encroachment.

¶39

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶40

Sri M P Krishne Gowda v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M P Krishne Gowda 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S M S R Textiles Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. G. M. a. Industries Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Naganna Vs the Chief Secretary

M/S Chamundi Builders Vs Authorised Officer

Murali Vs the Director General and Igp

Sri.K.H.Hanumanthaiah Vs Sri Prakashchand