Gokula Education Foundation ( Medical) Vs Upa Lokayukta -I

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO. 36599 OF 2015 (GM-KLA)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION (MEDICAL) A REGISTERED TRUST HAVING ITS OFFICE AT "GOKULA HOUSE", GOKULA EXTENSION, BENGALURU-560 054.

¶11

REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN SRI M.R.SEETHARAM.

¶12

&PETITIONER

¶13

Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SMT. APARNA N, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. G. K. BHAVANA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

UPA LOKAYUKTA -I KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU -560 001, REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR.

¶17

ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ENQUIRIES-11 KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

BENGALURU -560 001.

¶22

COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU -560 002.

¶23

COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU -560 020.

¶24

&RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARABATTI., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI. A JAGANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. G LAKSHMEESH RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DTD.02.03.2015 ANNEX-R DTD.28.5.2015 ANNEX-T PASSED BY R-2.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANT TO ORDERS DTD.2.3.2015 ANNEX-R DATED 28.5.2015 ANNEX-T PASSED BY R-1 AND ETC.,

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶34

Heard Sri G Krishnamurthy, learned Senior Counsel along

¶35

with Smt Aparna N learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Venkatesh S Arabatti, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri A. Jaganath, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and Sri G. Lakshmeesh Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

¶36

The petitioner is a Trust which runs several educational institutions including M.S. Ramaiah Medical College, M.S. Ramaiah Engineering College etc., When the lands were acquired for 2^nd stage of Raj Mahal Vilas layout way back in the year 1982 in respect of the land in Survey No.44 situated at Chikkamaranahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, a request was made for de-notifying 4 acres 8 guntas of land from the acquisition proceedings by the Chairman of Gokul Education Foundation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trust'). As per the Government Notification dated 24.07.1999, the land to an extent of 4 acres 8 guntas in Survey No.44 was left out from the acquisition proceedigns. This land has been earmarked as open space in the Master Plan of the Bengaluru Development

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Authority (for short 'the BDA') and presently, it is being used as a playground by the Trust.

¶41

It appears that a complaint was filed before the

¶42

Lokayukta alleging that the said public land is being used by the Trust for its own purpose. A report was called from the Commissioner of BDA enquiring the status of the said land. A report dated 27.05.2015 was submitted by the Commissioner of BDA after making due enquiry, in which the representative of the Trust also participated and submitted relevant documents wherein it was categorically stated that the said land was a private land of the Trust. Further, the Commissioner of BDA submitted another report dated 01.07.2015 reiterating that the land in question was a private land of the Trust.

¶43

Despite this report of the Commissioner, BDA the Lokayukta has directed the BDA to take possession of the said land and put the signboard that this property is a public property meant for playground.

¶44

Sri G. Krishnamurthy, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner submitted that the Lokayukta does

¶45

5 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

not have the power to pass the direction impugned in this writ petition inasmuch as the Lokayukta could have made a recommendation, but in the present case, he has given positive direction to the Commissioner of the BDA to take possession of the land. He further submits that the Commissioner of the BDA has submitted the report specifically stating that 4 acres 8 guntas of land in Survey No.44 is a private land belonging to the Trust and this land has been earmarked as a playground, as such, the direction to take over possession and put the signboard is not only illegal but without jurisdiction.

¶49

6 Sri G. Lakshmeesh Rao, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.4 - BDA submitted that despite the report submitted by the Commissioner of BDA regarding the status of the land, the Lokayukta has passed the impugned direction. He further submitted that this land belongs to the Trust which is a private land, but earmarked as playground.

¶50

Sri Venkatesh S Arabatti, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2- Lokayukta, however, supports the direction issued by the Lokayukta and submits that the petitioner ought to have appeared before the Lokayukta and

¶51

6 -

¶52

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

produced relevant documents in support of the claim that this

¶55

land is their private land. The petitioner was called upon to submit the proof of their ownership, but they failed to do so. Therefore, in absence of evidence regarding their ownership, the Lokayukta has passed the order inasmuch as no one can occupy the public land. He further submitted that the Commissioner of BBMP and the Commissioner of BDA appeared before the Lokayukta on 27.05.2015 and made a specific statement that this land is a public land meant for playground. However, Sri Venkatesh S Arabatti, learned counsel for Lokayukta does not deny the submission of the report by the Commissioner of BDA in which it is specifically stated that this 4 acres 8 guntas in Survey.No.44 was de-notified from the acquisition proceedings and it is a private land of the Trust.

¶56

Considering the aforesaid report in which the Commissioner of BDA has specifically stated that the land in question is a private land of the Trust, which is earmarked as playground and the playground is being maintained on the said land, we are of the considered view that the direction issued by the Lokayukta for taking over physical possession of the land

¶57

7 -

¶58

NC: 2025:KHC:35642-DB WP No. 36599 of 2015

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

and putting up signboard are not proper. Therefore, we set aside the directions, however, we direct the petitioner to maintain the said land as a playground.

¶61

With the above observations, writ petition is

¶62

allowed .

¶63

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶64

Sd/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶65

RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

Gokula Education Foundation ( Medical) v. Upa Lokayukta -I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gokula Education Foundation ( Medical) v. Upa Lokayukta -I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Krishnappa @ Krishna Vs the Divisional Manager

Smt. Jayamala Vs the State of Karnataka

The Manager Vs Smt. Vasantha

Smt. Nandini H Vs Shri.C.P.Sundar Raj

The State of Karnataka Vs the Honble Lokayukta

M/S. Computek India Ltd., Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.