Sri Ashwathappa Vs the State of Karnataka

THE RAJIV GANDHI RURAL CORPORATION LTD HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO 1, 2, 3, 4 IT PARK, 1ST FLOOR, 4TH MAIN ROAD, RAJAJINAGARA, INDUSTRIAL AREA RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU 560044 REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶30

GENERAL MANAGER (TECH)

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. M.N.SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1-R4; SRI. VIKRAM HUILGOL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR

¶33

SMT. SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R5)

¶34

THE WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SECURE THE RECORDS IN WP

¶35

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:10018-DB WA No. 588 of 2024

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

No-6578/2023 (KLR-RES) FROM THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT, ETC.

¶38

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶39

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶40

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶41

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

¶42

The writ appeal has been taken up in the revised call

¶43

as neither the counsel for the appellants nor the appellants were present on the first call.

¶44

Even in the revised call, there is no representation on behalf of the appellants.

¶45

Sri M.N. Sudev Hegde, learned AGA appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri Vikram Huilgol, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Smt. Shilpa Rani, learned counsel for the caveator/Respondent No.5 have made submissions on behalf of the respondents, on the merits of the appeal.

¶46

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order 11.03.2024 passed by

¶47

4 -

¶48

NC: 2026:KHC:10018-DB WA No. 588 of 2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6578/2023 (KLR-RES),

¶51

filed by the appellants herein.

¶52

The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

¶53

The petitioners had moved an application in Form No.53 seeking regularization of their unauthorized occupation in Survey No.1 of Muddenahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North (Additional) Taluk.

¶54

The decision in respect of the said application was required to be taken by the concerned Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner vide order dated 28.09.2022 had rejected the application of the petitioners for regularization of the land in Sy.No.1 of Muddenahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North (Additional) Taluk. The ground for rejection of the application of the petitioners was the distance between the periphery of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for

¶55

5 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:10018-DB WA No. 588 of 2024

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

short 'the BBMP' ) and the land in question was less than 18 kms.

¶59

During the pendency of the writ petition, the writ Court vide interim order dated 26.09.2023 directed the Chief Commissioner, BBMP, to ascertain the distance of the land having regard to the limits of Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike as on 29.07.1991 i.e., the date of the application filed by the petitioners in Form No.53 and submit a report to the Court.

¶60

In compliance of the said direction issued by the writ Court vide order dated 26.09.2023, the report dated 23.11.2023 was submitted, which would mention the distance between the land in question and the boundary of the Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike as existed on 29.07.1991 is 11.5 kms.

¶61

Considering the fact that the land in question is situated within the prohibited distance for regularization, the writ Court has dismissed the writ petition. We see no

¶62

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:10018-DB WA No. 588 of 2024

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

reason to interfere with the well considered judgment of the learned Single Judge, which is based on the facts that the land in question is situated within the prohibited distance of less than 18 kms and therefore, we find no merit and substance in this appeal, which is why we dismiss this appeal.

¶65

In view of dismissal of the writ appeal interim applications, if any do not survive for consideration, hence disposed of.

¶66

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶67

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶68

NG CT:SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Sri Ashwathappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Ashwathappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Elegant Builders Vs Sri H R Venkatesh

Executive Officer Vs State of Karnataka

The Tahasildar, Vs Ramesh

The Chairman Vs Sri Jagadish R

M/s Marketing Consultants and Agencies Limited Vs S M Pasha

Nandi Inffastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. Vs Karnataka State Human Rights Commission