Partly allowed¶31

Smt. Shakunthala v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Feb 2025WP/2090/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC Bengaluru; WP 2090/2025 (GM-FOR); R Devdas J; 04-02-2025; forest department eviction/enquiry and appellate orders quashed; land granted under Karnataka Land Grant Rules; RTC in petitioner's name; reliance on W.P. Nos. 203376-377/2014 (Kalaburagi Bench, 05.06.2020); Show Cause Notice before eviction; proceed in accordance with law after securing Revenue Authority information; Articles 226 & 227; Chikkamagaluru/Tarikere/Shivamogga.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 08.01.2015 at Annexure 'F' and order dated 30.07.2024 at Annexure 'D' quashed and set aside; Forest Authorities or any other empowered Authority permitted to issue a Show Cause Notice, and if the petitioner shows Revenue-Authority grant, to secure information from the Revenue Authorities and proceed in accordance with law. ¶31

Smt. Shakunthala Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the orders passed by the Forest Department authorities — the order dated 08.01.2025 in Appeal No. 11/2024-25 (R-2, Annexure-F) and the order dated 30.07.2024 in Enquiry No. SA.A.SAM.LAKKAVALLI 64(A) 444/2024-25 (R-3, Annexure-D) — directing the petitioner, whose lands were granted by the Revenue Authorities under the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, to hand over possession should be quashed.

¶18

Court's answer

The petitioner is entitled to the same relief as was granted in Writ Petition Nos.203376-377/2014 (Kalaburagi Bench).

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order dated 08.01.2015 at Annexure 'F' and the order dated 30.07.2024 at Annexure 'D' are quashed and set aside (writ petition partly allowed).

¶31

Key takeaways

The respondent-Forest Authorities or any other empowered Authority may issue a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner calling upon her to explain why she should not be evicted from the lands in question.ratio¶31
If the petitioner replies producing relevant documents showing the lands were granted by the Revenue Authorities in her favour, the Forest Authorities must secure information from the Revenue Authorities and thereafter proceed in accordance with law.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 2090 of 2025 (GM-FOR), decided 04.02.2025 by Hon'ble Mr Justice R Devdas (High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru). Filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner (an agriculturist whose lands were granted by the competent authority under the Karnataka Land Grant Rules and whose RTCs stood in her name) sought quashing of the order dated 08.01.2025 in Appeal No. 11/2024-25 passed by R-2 (Conservator of Forest cum Appellate Authority, Annexure-F) and the order dated 30.07.2024 in Enquiry No. SA.A.SAM.LAKKAVALLI 64(A) 444/2024-25 passed by R-3 (Assistant Conservator of Forest cum Competent Authority, Annexure-D), by which she had been directed to hand over possession to Forest Department officials. Relying on the course adopted in Writ Petition Nos.203376-377/2014 (Kalaburagi Bench, 05.06.2020), the Court held the petitioner entitled to similar relief, partly allowed the petition, quashed and set aside both impugned orders, and held that the Forest Authorities or any empowered Authority may issue a Show Cause Notice; if the petitioner produces documents showing grant by the Revenue Authorities, the Forest Authorities must obtain information from the Revenue Authorities and proceed in accordance with law.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:4959 WP No. 2090 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 2090 OF 2025 (GM-FOR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SHAKUNTHALA WIFE OF SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE R/O BAMBUSARA VILLAGE, TARIKERE TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. HIREMATHAD MAHESHIAH RUDRAYYA., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA LAXMI YASHODA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND ECOLOGY M.S BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE -560 001 2. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CUM THE APPELLATE AUTHRITY, SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE, SHIVAMOGGA -577204

¶14

ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CUM THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, TARIKERE SUB DIVISION TARIKERE CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT -577228 …RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. SESHU V., HCGP)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:4959 WP No. 2090 of 2025

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 08.01.2025 PASSED IN APPEAL NO. 11/2024-25 PASSED BY THE R-2 PRODUCED AT ANNX-F CONSEQUENLTY QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 30.07.2024 PASSED IN ENQUIRY NO. SA.A.SAM.LAKKAVALLI 64(A) 444/2024-25 PASSED BY THE R-3 PRODUCED AT ANNX-D AND ETC.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for all the respondents.

¶23

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is a case, which is similar to many other cases that have come before this Court and this Court found that these are the cases where the lands were granted by the competent authority under the Karnataka Land Grant Rules and the RTCs are standing in the name of the petitioner even till date. However, the Officers of the Forest Department proceeded to pass the impugned

¶24

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4959 WP No. 2090 of 2025

¶25

orders despite the fact that the land has been granted by the Revenue Authorities. Such orders are passed directing the petitioner to hand over possession to officials of the Forest Department.

¶26

Learned Counsel for petitioner points out to one such case in Writ Petition Nos.203376-377/2014 disposed of on 05^th June, 2020 at Kalaburagi Bench and submits that this Court under similar circumstances partly allowed the writ petitions and quashed the impugned notices/ orders and thereafter, directed the Officials of the Forest Department to issue Show Cause Notice to the petitioners calling upon them to explain as to why they should not be evicted from the lands in question and petitioners therein were permitted to give a reply producing relevant documents to show that the lands have been granted by the Revenue Authorities in their favour and then, the Forest Authorities will have to secure information from the

¶27

Revenue Authorities and thereafter, proceed in accordance with law.

¶28

The petitioner is entitled for similar relief.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:4959 WP No. 2090 of 2025

¶31

Accordingly, the present writ petition is partly allowed . The impugned order dated 08.01.2015 at Annexure ‘F’ and the order dated 30.07.2024 at Annexure ‘D’ are hereby quashed and set aside. However, the respondent-Forest Authorities or any other Authority who is empowered, may issue a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner calling upon her to explain as to why she should not be evicted from the lands in question. If a reply is given by the petitioner producing the relevant documents to show that the lands have been granted by the Revenue

¶32

Authorities in her favour, then the Forest Authorities will have to secure information from the Revenue Authorities and thereafter proceed in accordance with law.

¶33

Ordered accordingly.

¶34

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶35

CT: JL

¶36

Smt. Shakunthala v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shakunthala v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Praveen Bhandary Vs the Authorized Officer

Kempahonnaiah IAS Vs Department of Personnel and Training

Mr Siddaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

M K Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Abdul Aleem Vs Indusind Bank Limited

Smt. P. N. Vijayalakshmi Vs Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd.