Karnataka Janata Vedike Vs State of Karnataka

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO INITIATE THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE LAND GRABBERS/ENCROACHERS OF THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.43 MEASURING 20 ACRES 24 GUNTA OUT OF TOTAL EXTENT OF 44 ACRES 30 GUNTAS OF KACHOHALLI VILLAGE, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING (PROHIBITION) ACT, 2011 TO SECURE THE GOVERNMENT LAND BY EVICTING THE LAND GRABBERS AND UTILISE SAME FOR THE PUBLIC PURPOSE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and

¶26

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:7178-DB WP No. 1704 of 2025

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶31

Heard learned advocate Mr. R. Srinivasa Gowda for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar who appears to assist the court upon service of copy of the petition in advance.

¶32

In this petition styled as public interest litigation, the petitioner-Karnataka Janata Vedike, through its President, raised a grievance inter alia that the land bearing Sy.No.43 total admeasuring 44 Acres and 30 Guntas which is at Kachohalli Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluka, is encroached to the extent of 20 Acres and 24 Guntas. It is the case of the petitioner that the encroachers are the land grabbers within the meaning of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011.

¶33

2.1. It is the further say of the petitioner that despite the act of

¶34

alleged encroachment and alleged land grabbing, the respondents have not taken any steps since last 14 years. It is the contention of the petitioner that it is in the public interest that the present petition is filed.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:7178-DB WP No. 1704 of 2025

¶37

The petitioner has stated that the land in question is highly

¶38

valuable land and that the authorities have harbored fraudulent intentions not to take any steps and are not interested in protecting the public property which is, according to the petitioner, evident because of inaction on part of the respondents.

¶39

On such basic premise, the prayer is made to direct the respondent-authorities to initiate proceedings against the alleged land grabbers/encroachers on the said land and to evict them to utilize the land for public purpose. It is the next prayer to direct the respondents to delete the illegal revenue entries which stand in the revenue records in respect of Sy.No.43 of Kachohalli Village.

¶40

Whether there is an encroachment or not and if there is an encroachment, to what extent, whether the encroachment amounts to 'land grabbing' in law and whether the persons occupying the land are the 'land grabbers' within the meaning of the provisions of

¶41

the 2011 Act - are all questions which require a factual inquiry. Such exercise cannot be undertaken in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner may pursue the grievance by making appropriate representation to the authorities,

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7178-DB WP No. 1704 of 2025

¶43

who may examine the facts which may have been put up by the petitioner in the above regard and to finally decide as to whether any action is to be contemplated under the 2011 Act against the alleged encroachers.

¶44

At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioner stated that the representation is already made to the respondents on several occasions 05.07.2024, 31.07.2024, 01.08.2024 as well as on 02.08.2024.

¶45

6.1. Responding to this, learned Additional Government Advocate

¶46

submitted that the Competent Authority of the respondents shall look into the representations, examine the facts and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law with regard to what is submitted by the petitioner in the representations.

¶47

Providing that the exercise of looking into the representations and taking appropriate decision in accordance with law shall be completed preferably within a period of six weeks from today, the present petition is not entertained. It is dismissed subject to above directions.

¶48