Disposed

Sri M a Amrutharaju v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Jan 2026WP/52729/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner in possession of 4 acres of forest-classified land faced eviction orders upheld in appeal without reasons or consideration of his possession claim and grants to others in the same survey number. High Court quashed both orders, remanded for fresh consideration after hearing petitioner within 90 days.

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 13.05.2019 and 25.09.2019 quashed; proceedings remitted for reconsideration within 90 days; no precipitative action till disposal.

Sri M a Amrutharaju Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 52729 OF 2019 (GM-FOR)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI M A AMRUTHARAJU S/O LATE MUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT LINGAPURA VILLAGE, UMBLEBYLU POST, SHIMOGA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. HARSHA KUMAR GOWDA H R.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶15

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

¶17

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶18

THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST SHIMOGA CIRCLE, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201.

¶19

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CHANNAGIRI SUB DIVISION, CHANNAGIRI-577 202.

¶20

RANGE FOREST OFFICER

¶21

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

UMBLEBYLU RANGE, UMBLEBYLU, SHIMOGA TALUK-577 201.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.05.2019 PASSED BY THE R-3 AT ANNX-H; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2019 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN APPEAL NO.35/2019-20 AT ANNX-L.

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

Petitioner who claims to be in possession and enjoyment

¶32

of an extent of 4 acres of land in Sy.No.17 situated at Lingapura Village, Shivamogga Taluk and District for over 60 years, is before this Court seeking following reliefs;

¶33

"a) Issue writ of certiorari or similar writ, order or direction to quash the order dated 13.05.2019 passed by the 3rd respondent in No. Cha U Vi/Land Acquisition / G.L:06/2019-20 at Annexure-H;

¶34

b) Issue writ of certiorari or similar writ, order or direction to quash the order dated 25.09.2019 passed by the 2^nd respondent in Appeal No.35/2019-20 at Annexure-L;

¶35

c) Issue any other writ, order or directions as this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

Facts in brief are that; the petitioner has

¶40

constructed a Mangalore Tiled house and has been cultivating the aforesaid land without any obstruction from anyone whomsoever. That his name is reflected in the RTC extract produced at Annexure-D and he has also paid the property tax. That survey was also conducted demarcating the area in possession of the petitioner. Things stood thus, mother of the petitioner had submitted an application to the Tahsildar, Shivamogga on 29.07.1998 seeking regularization of occupation over the aforesaid land which is pending for over 22 years. Thereafter, petitioner also submitted another application before the President of Forest Right Committee on 19.11.2009, which is also pending. A complaint came to be registered against the petitioner by the respondent No.3 in Proceedings No.06/2019-20. Respondent No.3 without giving any opportunity to petitioner passed Order dated 13.05.2019 directing the petitioner to vacate the aforesaid land within 30 days from the date of the order. Being aggrieved, petitioner preferred an appeal in Appeal No.35/2019-2020 before the respondent No.2 challenging the said order. That respondent No.2, without considering the documents and the evidence

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

produced by the petitioner regarding his possession of the property, dismissed the appeal, confirming the order passed by the respondent No.3. Being aggrieved, the present petition.

¶45

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein had specifically raised a ground with regard to portions of land having been granted in the name of certain K. Krishnamoorthy and Smt.B.V. Nagarathnamma in the very same survey number to the extent of 2 acres and 4 acres respectively. He refers to copy of RTC produced at Annexure-M for the year 2019-2020 reflecting the name of one Sri.K. E. Krishnamoorthy, s/o Erappagowda to the extent of 2 acres of land in Sy.No.17. Similarly, an extent of 4 acres of land in the said survey number having been granted in favour of one Smt.B. V. Nagarathamana. Thus, he submits that without adverting to these factual aspect of the matter, the respondent/authorities have proceeded to pass the impugned order merely based on certain Government order, which has no relevance to the facts of the case. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition.

¶46

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

In response, learned AGA submitted that the land in

¶50

Sy.No.17 has been declared and classified as 'Minor Forest' in terms of the Government Order dated 17.08.1929. Proceedings against the petitioner has been initiated in terms of Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. She further submits that the Appellate authority had indeed formulated points for his consideration as found at page No. 18 (ink page 67) of the impugned order and the Appellate authority having satisfied itself with regard to the material placed on record has come to the conclusion in holding that the petitioner has encroached and is in unlawful occupation of the land. Accordingly, proceeded to pass order under Section 64(A) of the Forest Act, 1963. As such no error or illegality can be found in the said order. Hence, seeks for dismissal of the petition.

¶51

Heard. Perused the records.

¶52

There is no dispute of the fact that petitioner has

¶53

been in possession of the land measuring 4 acres in said Sy.No.17 situated at Lingapura Village, Shivamogga Taluk and District. Respondent/forest department claims the said forms part of forest area and that land in Sy.No.17 measures 204.38

¶54

¶55

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

acres. Perusal of the impugned order by the respondent No.2/Appellate authority indicate that the same has been passed solely in the light of directions issued by the Apex Court in the case of T. N. GODAVARMAN, THIRUMALAPAD VS.

¶58

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 2386 . There is no discussions or reasoning assigned with regard to the claim made by the petitioner of he being in possession for over 60 years and also with regard to grant of certain portion of the land in the very same survey number in favour of Sri. K.E. Krishnamoorthy and Smt. B. V. Nagarathnamma as contented. Relevant to extract the portion of the impugned order passed by the Respondent /Appellate authority in which at page 18 (running page 67 of writ petition) following issues have been framed for its consideration and at page 19 and 20(running page 68 and 69 of the writ petition) the same have been adverted to as under;

¶59

"JgÀqÀÄ PÀqÉAiÀÄªÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¹zÀ PÀqÀvÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA¥ÀÆtðªÁV ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ F ¢¸ÉAiÀÄ°è GzÀãªÀªÁzÀ «ªÁzÁA±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ:-

¶60

"1. �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರರು �ೕಲ�ನ�ಸ� � ದ�ವ�ಗ��ಾಲೂ�ಕು , �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ�ಾ�ಮ , ಸ . ನಂ 17 ರಭೂಪ��ೇಶವ� ಅರಣ# ಪ��ೇಶ$ೆ ?

¶61

2. �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರರು ಭ�ಾ�ವ% �ಾಲೂ�ಕು , �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ �ಾ�ಮ , ಸ . ನಂ 17 &ೆ' ಸಂಬಂ)�ದ ಬ�ೆ� �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರರ ಪರ$ಾ* &ಾನೂನು +ೕ%ಯ -ಾವ��ೆ �ಾಖ/ೆಗಳನು1 ಒದ*�ರುವವ3ೇ ?

¶62

¶63

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

3. �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರರು �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ �ಾ�ಮದ ಸ . ನಂ 17 ರ 3-08 ಎಕ3ೆ ಅರಣ# ಜ6ೕನನು1 ಒತು8ವ+9ಾ:ರುವ�ದುಸಂಶ-ಾ%ೕತ$ಾ*;ಾ<ೕ�ಾ*�ೆ=ೕ ?

¶66

4. ಕ>ಾ?ಟಕ ಅರಣ# &ಾ=A 64( ಎ ) ಪ�&ಾರ ಆ�ೇಶ Cೕ:ರುವ ಅ)ೕನ ಅ)&ಾ+ಯವರು�ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರ+�ೆ ಸೂಕ8ಅವ&ಾಶವನು1 Cೕ:ರುವವ3ೇ ?

¶67

5. ಅಂ%ಮಆ�ೇಶ$ೇನು ?

¶68

�$ಾ�ಾಂಶ�ದಲ>ೆಯದ&ೆ' ನನ1 ಉತ8ರಸ&ಾ3ಾತ�ಕ (Positive)

¶69

ಅದ&ೆ' &ಾರಣ �ವ�ಗ� E/ೆ� , �ವ�ಗ� �ಾಲೂ�ಕು , �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ �ಾ�ಮ , ಸ . ನಂ 17 ¸ÀPÁðj DzÉÃ±À ¸ÀASÉå: G 2255-Ft-109-27-76 dated 17th August 1929 gÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ °AUÁ¥ÀÄgÀ ಎಂಎGಅರಣ# ಪ��ೇಶ$ಾ*ರುತ8�ೆ .

¶70

Hಾರತದ ಸIೕ?ಚK >ಾ#-ಾಲಯದ j.¦. (¹«¯ï) ¸ÀA:202/1995gÀ°è L . ಎM . �ೋ�ಾವರಮM %ರುಮು¯ïÌNಾO ವgÀì¸ï AiÀÄÆ¤ಯM ಆG ಇಂ:-ಾ ಮತು8 ಇತರರು ಇದರ�� ಈ &ೆಳಕಂಡಂ�ೆ + . S ( ��T ) ಸಂ : 171/96 ರ ಮಧ#ಂತರ ಆ�ೇಶCೕ:ರುತ8�ೆ Vಾಗೂ �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ�ಾ�ಮಸ . ನಂ 17 ರಪ��ೇಶದಬ�ೆ� -ಾವ��ೇ Cಖರ$ಾದ �ೕಜW 9ಾ: Xೕ: ನ&ಾYೆಯನು1 �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರರು �Zಾರ[ೆಯ ಸಂದಭ?ದ��Cೕಡುರುವ�\ಲ� ".

¶71

"The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was enacted with a view to check further deforestation which ultimately results in ecological imbalance and therefore, the provisions made therein for the conservation of forests and for matters connected therewith, must apply to all forests irrespective of the nature of ownership of classification thereof. The word 'forest must be under stood according to its dictionary meaning. This description covers all statutorily recognised forests, whether designated as reserved, protected or otherwise for the purpose of Section2(i) of the forest Conservation Act. The term "forest land", occurring in section 2 will not only include "forest" as understood in the dictionary sense, but also any area recorded as forest in the government record irrespective of the ownership. This is how it has to be understood for the purpose of section 2 of the Act. The provisions enacted in the forest Conservation Act 1980 for the conservation of forest and

¶72

¶73

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

the matters connected therewith must apply clearly to all forests so understood irrespective of the ownership or classification thereof".

¶76

ಎಂದು %]��ೆ .

¶77

�$ಾ�ಾಂಶ ಎರಡ>ೆಯದ&ೆ' ನನ1 ಉತ8ರ ನ&ಾ3ಾತ�ಕ (Negative)

¶78

ಅ)ಕೃತ ಅ)&ಾ+ Vಾಗೂ ಸVಾಯಕ ಅರಣ# ಸಂರ_[ಾ)&ಾ+, Zೆನ1*+ ಉಪ �Hಾಗ, ಭ�ಾ�ವ%ರವರ ಕ>ಾ?ಟಕ ಅರಣ# &ಾ=A 1963 ಕಲಂ 64(ಎ) ಆ�ೇಶ ಸಂ`ೆ# : ಚ/ಾ� /5 / -06 / 2019-205 20໙໐:13.05.20190 ៨ ឯ �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ �ಾ�ಮ ಸ.ನಂ 17ರ�� -ಾವ��ಾದರು �ಾಖ/ೆ Vೊಂ\ದA3ೆ >ಾಂಕ:13.05.2019 ರಂದು �Zಾರ[ೆ�ೆ Vಾಜ3ಾ* 9ಾa% ಒದ*ಸಲು %]�ರುತ8�ೆ . �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರರು -ಾವ��ೇ �ಾಖ/ೆ Cೕಡುರುವ�\ಲ�, ಅರಣ#\ಂದ bಡುಗcೆ-ಾದ

¶79

�$ಾ�ಾಂಶ ಮೂರ>ೆಯದ&ೆ' ನನ1 ಉತ8ರ ಸ&ಾ3ಾತ�ಕ (Positive)

¶80

�ವ�ಗ� E/ೆ�, �ವ�ಗ� �ಾಲೂ�ಕು, �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ �ಾ�ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ 17ರ ಪ��ೇಶವ , G 2255-Ft-109-27-76 dated 17th August 1929ರ ಅನdಯ ;ೆM-35ರ ಪ�&ಾರ �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ ಎಂಎG ಅರಣ#$ಾ*ದುA, ಅ)ಕೃತ ಅ)&ಾ+ Vಾಗೂ ಸVಾಯಕ ಅರಣ# ಸಂರ[ಾ)&ಾ+, Zೆನ1*+ ಉಪ �Hಾಗ, ಭ�ಾ�ವ%ರವರ ಕ>ಾ?ಟಕ ಅರಣ# &ಾ=A 1963 ಕಲಂ 64(ಎ) ಆ�ೇಶದ >ಾಂಕ:13.05.2019ರ ಪ�&ಾರ �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ �ಾ�ಮ ಸ.ನಂ 17ರ�� ಒತು8ವ+�ಾರ3ಾದ ��ೕ ಎಂ ಎ ಅಮೃತ3ಾe ಇವರು ಅಕ�ಮ$ಾ* ಅನ)ಕೃತ$ಾ* ಒತು8ವ+ 9ಾ:ರುವ ಪ��ೇಶ �ಂ�ಾಪ�ರ ಎಂಎG ಅರಣ# ಪ��ೇಶದ�� ಕಂಡುಬರುತ8�ೆ ಇದ+ಂದ ಅರಣ# ಒತು8ವ+ 9ಾ:ರುವ�ದು `ಾ%�-ಾ*ರುತ8�ೆ .

¶81

�$ಾ�ಾಂಶ >ಾಲ'>ೆಯದ&ೆ' ನನ1 ಉತ8ರ ಸ&ಾ3ಾತ�ಕ (Positive)

¶82

ಸVಾಯಕ ಅರಣ# ಸಂರ_[ಾ)&ಾ+, Zೆನ1*+ ಉಪ �Hಾಗ, ಭ�ಾ�ವ% ಇವರು �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರ+�ೆ ಕ>ಾ?ಟಕ ಅರಣ# &ಾ=A 1963ರ 64(ಎ) �)ಯ ಪ�&ಾರ >ೋLಸು Cೕ:ದಂ�ೆ , >ಾಂಕ:30.05.2019 ರಂದು �Zಾರ[ೆಯನು1 Cಗ)ಪ:� Vೇ]&ೆಯನು1 ಪcೆಯ/ಾರುತ8�ೆ . ಆದುದ+ಂದ ಕ>ಾ?ಟಕ ಅರಣ# &ಾ=A 64(ಎ) ಪ�&ಾರ ಆ�ೇಶವನು1 Cೕ:ದ ಅ)ೕನ ಅ)&ಾ+ಗಳf �ೕಲ�ನ��ಾರ+�ೆ ಸೂಕ8 ಅವ&ಾಶವನು1 Cೕ:ರುವ��ಾ ಸgಷi$ಾ*ರುತ8�ೆ .

¶83

9ಾಡುವ�ದ&ೆ' ಸೂಕ8$ೆಂದು >ಾನು ಮನ�ೊಂ:ರು�ೆ8ೕ>ೆ . ಈ �ೕ�ನ ಎ/ಾ� ಅಂಶಗಳನು1 ಕೂಲಂಕುಷ$ಾ* ಗಮC� ಈ �ೕಲ�ನ�ಯು ವjಾ ªÀiÁqÀÄªÀÅzÀPÉÌ ¸ÀÆPÀÛªÉAzÀÄ £Á£ÀÄ ªÀÄ£ÀUÉÆArgÀÄvÉÛÃ£É."

¶84

¶85

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶86

HC-KAR

¶87

Clearly the impugned order is one without assigning

¶88

any reason on the issues so raised and is mere extraction of the portion of the order passed by the Apex Court in the Godavarman's case. As seen in the very impugned order at page No.4, the respondent No.2/Appellate Authority has extracted the grounds of appeal in extenso wherein at paragraph 8 thereof there is specific reference to the allegation made by the petitioner with regard to grant of 2 acres of land in favour of certain Sri. K.E.Krishnamoorthy and seeking parity on that ground by which has not been adverted to by the Respondent No.2/ Appellate authority.

¶89

The other aspect of the matter to be seen is though there is a reference to a Government Order bearing No. G2255Ft-109-27-76 dated 17.08.2029 in terms of which, the said Lingapura village has been purportedly declared as forest area, the question that remains unanswered is under which provision of law, extent of 2 acres of land in favour of Sri K. E. Krishnamoorthy (as found in RTC for the year 2019-2020) and another extent of 4 acres of land in favour of one Smt. B. V. Nagarathnamma has been granted in the very same Sy.No.17

¶90

10 -

¶91

NC: 2026:KHC:3072 WP No. 52729 of 2019

¶92

HC-KAR

¶93

as found at mutation register extract produced at page 75 of the writ petition. The respondent/ authorities are required to advert to the said issues and clarify whether the grant of land in their favour was made under provisions of any law and whether the same has been recognised. If so, why the case of the petitioner has not been considered on parity.

¶94

Since the impugned order passed by the Respondent No.2 /Appellate authority, bereft of any reasons as noted above, the order dated 25.09.2019 is quashed. Consequently, the order dated 13.05.2019 passed by the respondent No.3 is also quashed. Matter is remitted to respondent No.3/ Authorised officer and Assistant Conservator of Forest, who shall after affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and adverting to each and every ground urged by the petitioner, pass appropriate orders within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Petitioner herein shall appear before the respondent No.3 on 16.02.2026 without waiting for any further notice. The respondent No.3 shall reconsider the Proceeding No.06/20192020 afresh and pass appropriate order as directed above. It is

¶95