Dismissed¶53

Shri S K Omkar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Oct 2025WP/11945/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Karnataka Forests Act S.64A(3); forest land; Government Notification dated 02.09.1931 Maharaja of Mysore; Angatta Grama Aranya Pradesha; darakhast grant 1949; revenue entries confer no title over notified forest land; Sy.No.28 (new No.29) Angatta Village, Nandi hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk; T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India 2025 INSC 701; State of Karnataka v. Nirvane Gowda (2007)15 SCC 744; Articles 226 and 227; writ petition dismissed by Justice E.S. Indiresh, High Court of Karnataka, 10.10.2025.

What did the court decide?

As per the Government Notification dated 02.09.1931 passed by His Highness Maharaja of Mysore, the land in question has been declared as forest land; both authorities having arrived at their conclusion based on that entry, the land must be so declared and the Writ Petition has no merit. ¶47

Shri S K Omkar Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶53

Issue for consideration

Whether the land bearing Sy.No.28 (new No.29) at Angatta Village, Nandi hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk, held by the petitioner under successive sale deeds, is forest land belonging to the Forest Department under the Government Notification dated 02.09.1931 issued by His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore. +1 more

¶35

Court's answer

¶47

Ratio / Principle

Taking into consideration the declaration of law made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India (2025 INSC 701) and in State of Karnataka v. Nirvane Gowda ((2007)15 SCC 744), the Court found no merit in the Writ Petition.

¶52

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-FOR) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution — challenge to Order dated 28.03.2018 of the Assistant Conservator of Forests (Annexure-B) and Order dated 10.01.2022 of the Conservator of Forests in Appeal No.300/2018-19 under S.64A(3) of the Karnataka Forests Act (Annexure-A) — land Sy.No.28 (new No.29), Angatta Village, Nandi hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk, originally granted to Emmegala Byrappa on 12.02.1949 under darakhast by public auction and conveyed by successive registered sale deeds, lastly to the petitioner by Sale Deed dated 19.04.2008 — authorities held the land to be forest land forming part of Angatta Grama Aranya Pradesha per Government Notification dated 02.09.1931 of His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore — Held: the land stands declared forest by the 1931 Notification and the conclusions of both authorities based on that entry stand; acting on the declaration of law in T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India (2025 INSC 701) and State of Karnataka v. Nirvane Gowda ((2007)15 SCC 744) (revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to grant or enter names in respect of land declared forest), the writ petition was dismissed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.11945 OF 2023 (GM-FOR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI S.K. OMKAR S/O S R KRISHNAN AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT NO.246, 6^TH CROSS, 8^TH MAIN, 2^ND BLOCK JAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560011.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. HIMA KIRANA, ADVOCATE A/W SRI. PRAKASH TIMMANNA HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FOREST VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU -560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS ARANYA BHAVAN SANKEY ROAD MALLESWARAM BENGALURU -560055.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION CHIKKABALALPURA-562101.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER CHIKKABALLAPURA RANGE CHIKKABALALPURA-562101.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH B., AGA)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 10.01.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2/CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, IN APPEAL NO.300/2018-19 U/S 64A (3) OF THE KARNATAKA FORESTS ACT, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3/ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, IN THE ORIGINAL SIDE OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.SaAaSaM/Chim.pura/64A/ Angatta/ CR-19/2016-17 VIDE ANNX-B; AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the Order dated 10.01.2022 in Appeal No.300/2018-19 (Annexure-A) passed by respondent No.2 and the Order dated 28.03.2018 passed by respondent No.3(Annexure-B), inter alia, sought for

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

a direction to respondent No.1 to grant alternative land for cultivation, to the petitioner, in lieu of the land in question if ultimately, declared as a forest land.

¶30

The brief facts for adjudication of this Writ Petition are that, the land in question bearing Sy.No.28 (new No.29) measuring to an extent of 9 acres out of 2 acres, situate at Angatta Village, Nandi hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk was granted to one Emmegala Byrappa on 12.02.1949 under darakhast by way of public auction (Annexure-C). It is further stated that the respondent - authorities have entered the name of Emmegala Byrappa in the revenue records. It is also stated that original grantee executed registered Sale Deed dated 24.03.1962(Annexure-E) in favour of one Sri. Muniswamy in

¶31

respect of the subject land. Thereafter, the portion of the land was also sold as per the registered Sale Deeds dated 02.05.1949 and 16.05.1975 (Annexures - D and F). It is also stated that the petitioner herein had purchased portion of the land from Syed Maroof Ahmed as per the registered Sale Deed

¶32

dated 19.04.2008 and therefore, it is the contention of the petitioner that, the petitioner is the owner of the land in

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

question. It is also stated in the petition that the respondent - forest authorities claiming that the land in question is belonging to the Forest Department as per the Government Notification dated 02.09.1931 by His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore and therefore, since the petitioner is in possession of the land in question, petitioner has challenged the same before the respondent No.3.

¶36

The respondent No.3 having taken note of the factual aspects on record, by Order dated 28.03.2018 (Annexure-B), rejected the claim made by the petitioner herein and held that the land in question is a forest land and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the respondent No.2 in Appeal No.300/2018-19 and the Appellate Authority, by Order dated 10.01.2022 (Annexure-A), held that the land in question is belonging to Angatta Grama Aranya Pradesha and as such, rejected the claim made by the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition.

¶37

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Heard Sri. Hima Kirana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Manjunath B., learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶40

It is contended by Sri. Hima Kirana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, both the authorities have not considered the factual aspects on record as the land in question was belonging to the vendors of the petitioner and therefore, the interference made by the respondent - authorities requires to be interfered with in this Writ Petition. It is also stated that the revenue entries stand in the name of vendor of the petitioner for more than 70 years and that would make it clear that, the land has been granted in favour of one Emmegala Byrappa as per Annexure-C and therefore, the impugned order requires to be set aside in this Writ Petition.

¶41

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate sought to justify the impugned order passed by the respondent - authorities and submitted that, way back in 1931 itself the land has been earmarked and declared as forest land. In that view of the matter, any number of subsequent revenue entries in respect of the subject land will not confirm any title to the

¶42

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

petitioner herein and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶46

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is the case of the petitioner that the land in question has been granted in favour of one Emmegala Byrappa as per the Grant Order dated 12.02.1949 (Annexure-C) and thereafter, the land in question has been sold by several persons and ultimately the petitioner has purchased the land in question as per the registered Sale Deed dated 19.04.2008(Annexure-J) from one Syed Maroof Ahmed. Perusal of the writ papers would indicate that as per the Government Notification dated 02.09.1931 passed by His Highness Maharaja of Mysore, the land in question has been

¶47

declared as forest land and in that view of the matter, since both the authorities have arrived at the conclusion based on the entry dated 02.09.1931 and therefore, the land in question has to be declared as forest land and as such, there is no merit in this Writ Petition. It is also to be noted that recently the

¶48

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, vide

¶49

¶50

NC: 2025:KHC:40011 WP No. 11945 of 2023

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

Judgment dated 15.05.2025 (2025 INSC 701), has issued the guidelines with regard to protecting the forest land as well as the environmental clearance granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MOEF), in the said case. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the declaration of law made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case as well as the case of STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS Vs. NIRVANE GOWDA AND OTHERS reported in (2007)15 SCC 744, wherein it is held that the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to grant or enter the name of persons in respect of the subject land if the land in question is declared as forest land as per the Notification therein, and therefore, there is no merit in this Writ Petition.

¶53

In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶54

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶55

sac

¶56

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

Shri S K Omkar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri S K Omkar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Vasudeva Prabhu Vs the State of Karnataka

Prasad Vs Karnataka Information Commissioner

Sri M Narasappa Reddy Vs the Bengaluru District Maintenance and

Sri S M Manjunath Vs Sri Prabhu

M/S Krishna Creations Vs Mr. Vijay Kumar B R

Eidgah Vs Karnataka State Board of Wakf