Shakti Sri Sirdi Sai Seva Samithi Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS ONE HELD BY THE R-5 DATED 22.04.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION.

¶32

IN WP NO. 18219/2015

¶33

BETWEEN:

¶34

SHAKTI SRI SIRDI SAI SEVA SAMITHI

¶35

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

SREE RAMA TEMPLE COMPLEX (DAKSHINA AYODHDYA) SREE RAMA TEMPLE ROAD KACHARAKANAHALLI H B R LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 043 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI P BABU S/O LATE PADMANABHA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

¶38

…PETITIONER

¶39

(BY SRI. C M NAGABUSHANA, ADVOCATE)

¶40

AND:

¶41

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VIDHANASOUDHA

¶42

BANGALORE-560 001.

¶43

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN K G ROAD

¶44

BANGALORE-560 009.

¶45

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION KANDAYABHAVAN BUILDING K G ROAD

¶46

BANGALORE-560 009.

¶47

THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK KANDAYABHAVAN BUILDING K G ROAD

¶48

BANGALORE-560 009.

¶49

THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR NADAKACHERI DEVARAJEEVANAHALLI

¶50

4 -

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

KASABA-1

¶54

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 560 045.

¶55

THE REVENUE INSPECTOR DEVARAJEEVANAHALLI CIRCLE KASABA HOBLI

¶56

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 560 045.

¶57

…RESPONDENTS

¶58

(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA)

¶59

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS ONE HELD BY THE R-5 DATED 22.04.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-H TO THE WRIT PETITION.

¶60

IN WP NO. 18306/2015

¶61

BETWEEN:

¶62

INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS

¶63

A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1861 ALSO REGISTERED UNDER THE BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUSTS ACT, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT HARE KRISHNA LAND, JUHU, MUMBAI -400 036. AND TEMPLE AT RAMA TEMPLE COMPOUND KACHARAKANAHALLI LINGARAJAPURAM MAIN ROAD H B R LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560043. REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI VARADA KRSNA DASA.

¶64

…PETITIONER

¶65

(BY SRI.SASRAVANA S., ADVOCATE)

¶66

AND:

¶67

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶68

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶71

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN K G ROAD

¶72

BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶73

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING K G ROAD BANGALORE 560 009.

¶74

THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING K G ROAD BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶75

THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR NADAKACHERI DEVARAJEEVANAHALLI KASABA - 560 097. BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.

¶76

THE REVENUE INSPECTOR DEVARAJEEVANAHALLI CIRCLE KASABA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 560 097.

¶77

…RESPONDENTS

¶78

(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA)

¶79

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS ONE HELD BY THE R-5 DATED 22.04.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION.

¶80

NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER

¶81

6 -

¶82

HC-KAR

¶83

IN WP NO. 18313/2015

¶84

BETWEEN:

¶85

VASAVI TRUST AND TEMPLE AT RAMA TEMPLE COMPOUND, KACHARAKANAHALLI, LINGARAJAPURAM MAIN ROAD H B R LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 072 REPRESENED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI G K PANDURANGAIAH.

¶86

…PETITIONER

¶87

(BY SRI. MOHAN BHAT., ADVOCATE)

¶88

AND:

¶89

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA

¶90

BANGALORE-560 001.

¶91

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN K G ROAD

¶92

BANGALORE-560 009.

¶93

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING K G ROAD

¶94

BANGALORE-560 009.

¶95

THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING K G ROAD

¶96

BANGALORE-560 009.

¶97

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER

¶98

HC-KAR

¶99

THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR NADAKACHERI DEVARAJEEVANAHALLI KASABA-1

¶100

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 560 072.

¶101

THE REVENUE INSPECTOR DEVARAJEEVANAHALLI CIRCLE KASABA HOBLI

¶102

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 560 072.

¶103

…RESPONDENTS

¶104

(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA)

¶105

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS ONE HELD BY THE R-5 DATED 22.4.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION.

¶106

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶107

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶108

ORAL ORDER

¶109

Petitioners in these writ petitions have a common grievance which is issuance of communication dated 22.04.2015 by the Assistant Tahsildar to the Tahsildar, Bangalore North Taluk, in terms of the said communication, the Assistant Tahsildar has claimed to have taken possession of Temples and religious institutions existing on the land bearing

¶110

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶111

Sy.No.153 of Kacharakanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, on the premise of same having been constructed on the Government land by encroaching upon them and has also claimed to have sealed the hundis of the said temples and institutions, which read as under:

¶112

"�ೕಲ�ಂಡ �ಷಯ ಉ�ೆ�ೕಖ�ೆ� ಸಂಬಂ��ದಂ�ೆ , ¢£ÁAPÀ 20.04.2015 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀiÁ£Àå ಉಪ ��ಾ�ಾ��ಾ�ಗಳ�, �ೆಂಗಳ ರು ಉತ$ರ ಉಪ ��ಾಗ ಮತು$ &ಾನ( ತಹ*ೕ�ಾ+,, �ೆಂಗಳ ರು ಉತ$ರ �ಾಲೂ�ಕು ರವರುಗಳ� ಕಸ�ಾ 0ೋಬ1 �ಾಚರಕನಹ13 �ಾ4ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ.153 ರ ಸ�ಾ5� �ೆ6ೆ ಅಂಗಳದ8� ಅನ�ಕೃತ:ಾ; <=5�ರುವ >ೇವ?ಾ@ನಗಳನುA ಸ�ಾ5ರದ ವಶ�ೆ� ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄÄªÀ ¸À®ÄªÁV ¸ÀÜ¼ÀzÀ°è ºÁdjgÀÄªÀAvÉ w½¹zÀÄÝ, £ÀAvÀgÀ 21-4-2015 gÀAzÀÄ ಸದ� ಅ��ಾ�ಗಳ ಸಮCಮದ8� ಅನ�ಕೃತ:ಾ; <=5�ದ+ �ೋದಂಡ6ಾಮ?ಾD= >ೇವ?ಾ@ನ, ಲEFೕನರ�ಂಹ?ಾD= >ೇವ?ಾ@ನ ಇ?ಾ�H >ೇವ?ಾ@ನ, ಕ<A�ಾ ಪರ�ೕಶD� >ೇವ?ಾ@ನ ಮತು$ ?ಾI �ಾ�ಾ >ೇವ?ಾ@ನ, ಕ�ಾ(ಣ ಮಂಟಪಗಳ� 0ಾಗೂ ಸದ� >ೇವ?ಾ@ನಗ1�ೆ ಸಂಬಂ��ದ ಹುಂLಗಳನುA ಸ�ಾ5ರದ ವಶ�ೆ� ಪMೆಯ�ಾIತು ಮತು$ ಹುಂLಗಳನುA �ೕN &ಾಡ�ಾ;>ೆ .

¶113

ೇವ?ಾ@ನಗಳ8� ನMೆಯುO$ರುವ ಪPQಾ �ೈಂಕಯ5ಗಳ� Sನ<ತ(ದಂ�ೆ ನMೆಯಲು ಅನುವT &ಾL�ೊಡ�ಾ;>ೆ 0ಾಗೂ ಸದ� ಸDತ$ನುA ಸ�ಾ5ರ�ೆ� ಪMೆSರುವ ಬ�ೆU VಾಮಫಲಕವನುA ಸಹ 0ಾಕ�ಾ;ರುತ$>ೆ . ಈ ಬ�ೆU YಾವT>ೇ ತಂZೆ ತಕ6ಾರು ಇರುವTSಲ�:ೆಂದು �ಾ4ಮ ಮಹಜ, <ಂದ O1ದುಬರುತ$>ೆ ಎಂಬ �ಷಯವನುA 6ಾಜಸD <�ೕCಕರ ವರS 0ಾಗೂ �ಾ4ಮ ಮಹಜ, VೊಂS�ೆ ಸ8 **�** >ೆ . (ಹುಂLಗ1�ೆ ಅಳವLಸ�ಾ;ರುವ ]ೕಗದ ^ೕಗಳನುA ಲಗO$�>ೆ )."

¶114

2. The endorsement further reads that there has been no opposition or objections from anyone whomsoever as

¶115

emanating from the mahazar drawn and the report of the revenue officer.

¶116

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶117

3. Sri.Sheshagiri Rao, learned counsel appearing for petitioner in W.P.No.18218/2015 refuting the contents of the said communication, draws attention of this Court to the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.6168/1990 as well as in O.S.No.8997/2014, which was initiated by the villagers of Kacharakanahalli against the State, Deputy Commissioner, Tahsildar and certain private individuals. Drawing attention of this Court to the contents of the said judgment, he submits that the religious institutions have been in existence as per the findings in the said judgment since over 500 years. The attempt of the respondent authorities to take over the land on two occasions has been resisted lawfully by the villagers. He also submits that on the second occasion, matter at the instance of the respondent-State was referred to Lok Adalath where the respondent-State had undertaken not to interfere with the affairs of the temple. Inspite of that, close to conclusion of said proceedings, the Assistant Tahsildar, in malafide exercise of his powers and without there being any authority has issued the impugned communication, once again re-igniting the issue which was already settled. He submits proceedings if any were to have been initiated by the Deputy

¶118

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶119

Commissioner in terms of Section 67 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Even on that count, the action initiated by respondent-Assistant Tahsildar is one without jurisdiction. He relies upon order dated 12.07.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.14456/2023 and submits that under identical circumstances the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while quashing similar communication had directed the authorities to initiate the proceedings in accordance with law. If such order is passed, he submits the purpose of the petition would be served.

¶120

4. Learned counsels appearing for the other petitioners adopt the submissions made by learned counsel Sri.Sheshagiri Rao.

¶121

5. Learned AGA in response submits that though there has been judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, there was a rider in that the defendants therein were reserved with liberty to initiate proceedings to remove the further encroachments. He submits by the impugned communication, the Tahsildar has only made attempt to remove the further encroachments. He however submits that in the light of the

¶122

11 -

¶123

NC: 2026:KHC:32199 WP No. 18218 of 2015 C/W WP No. 18219 of 2015 WP No. 18306 of 2015 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

¶124

order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.14456/2023 vide order dated 12.07.2023 and in the light of the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, the Deputy Commissioner or competent authority as the case may be would initiate action and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶125

6. In view of the aforesaid facts and submissions made

¶126

by learned counsel for the parties, petitions are allowed . Impugned communication dated 22.04.2015 is quashed.

¶127

7. The concerned Deputy Commissioner or the competent authority, as the case may be, is/are at liberty to initiate the proceedings with regard to any encroachment strictly in accordance with law and after affording sufficient opportunity to petitioners herein and parties interested and appropriate order in accordance with law shall be passed.

¶128

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶129

SBN

Shakti Sri Sirdi Sai Seva Samithi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakti Sri Sirdi Sai Seva Samithi 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

Smt Lakshmi R Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Umesh N D @ N D Umamaheshwara Vs the Authorized Officer and Chief Manager

Sri Monish R Vs Smt Jayamma

M/S Mrf Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Rama Chaitanya Vardhini Sabha Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Mrf Limited Vs Controller of Legal Metrology