Disposed

Smt Parvathi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jan 2024WP/922/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice for appearance that threatened dispossession. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to respond and stayed dispossession until proceedings conclude, leaving all contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to submit reply or appear; ordered not to be dispossessed pending conclusion of proceedings under the notice.

Smt Parvathi Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:1203 WP No. 922 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 922 OF 2024 (GM-FOR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT PARVATHI W/O VIRUPAKSHA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT KADAGARAVALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MARANAHALLI POST, SAKALESHAPURA TALUK - 573134 HASSAN DISTRICT

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SHANTAKUMAR K C., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, M S BUILDINGS, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE - 56001.

¶14

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

¶15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 5731201.

¶16

DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST HASSAN SUB-DIVISION HASSAN HASSAN - 5731201.

¶17

THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER SAKALESHPURA RANGE, SAKALESHPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573134.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI.KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP)

¶20

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC:1203 WP No. 922 of 2024

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DTD 22.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE R4 IN NO.SA.KAPU/VAAA/SIBBANDHI/V VA-01/2023-24 VIDE ANNEX-U.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question a notice dated 22.12.2023 directing appearance of the petitioner before the respondents, failing which, the petitioner would be dispossessed.

¶26

A writ petition had been preferred by the very petitioner before this Court in W.P.No.17941/2018, which comes to be disposed on 20.09.2022 by the following order:

¶27

" 7. For the reasons stated above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner as well as the Deputy Commissioner under the provisions contained in Section 136(2) and 136(3) of the Act cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed . The impugned orders dated 01.10.2024 at Annexure-B passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:1203 WP No. 922 of 2024

¶30

13.03.2018 at Annexure-A are hereby quashed and set aside.

¶31

8. Nevertheless, the respondent authorities are at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings to have the petitioner evicted from the land in question if it is proved that the land is a gomal land and it could not have been alienated at the hands of the respondent No.7 herein in favour of the petitioner. Consequently, the revenue entries as were standing before the impugned orders were passed shall be restored.

¶32

Ordered accordingly."

¶33

Liberty was granted to the respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings against the petitioner for eviction from the land in question, if it was proved that it is a gomal land , which could not have been alienated from the hands of the seventh respondent therein.

¶34

Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the impugned notice is issued. The petitioner has rushed to this Court after the issuance of notice. Therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to submit his reply to the said notice or appear before

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:1203 WP No. 922 of 2024

¶37

the concerned, in the event appearance is sought for and produce all such documents in his defence.

¶38

Till the proceedings are concluded pursuant to the notice, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the property. All the contentions are left open.

¶39

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41

Smt Parvathi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Parvathi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Syed Moinuddin Quadri Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Raj Thomas Vs Deputy Conservator of Forest

Sri. M. Ganesh Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S. K. R. Beverages Vs M/S. Canara Bank

Smt. Meenakshamma Vs the Principal Secretary

Shivi Bhushan Vs Rajat Nayyar