Karnataka High Court
Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel Pratisthan vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 October, 2025
Author: M.G.S.Kamal
Bench: M.G.S.Kamal
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224
WP No. 201775 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO.201775 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
SARDAR VALLABH BHAI PATEL PRATISTHAN,
CMC NO.9-3-146 AND 9-3-147
KANNAD JYOTI BUILDING, OUT SIDE SHAH GUNJ,
BEHIND DCC BANK, BIDAR-585 401,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,
SRI. SHIVASHARANAPPA WALI,
AGED ABOUT 93 YEARS,
OCC:JOURNALIST AND SOCIAL SERVICE,
R/O. WALI NILAYA, NANDI COLONY
BIDAR-585 401.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
KHAJAAMEEN
MALAGHAN THROUGH ITS PRL.SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
Location: HIGH DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
COURT OF MS BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.
KARNATAKA
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BIDAR,
D.C.OFFICE, BIDAR-584 401.
3. THE COMMISSIONER,
BIDAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
BUDA OFFICE, BIDAR-585 401.
4. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
ADLR OFFICE, TAHASIL OFFICE,
BIDAR-585 401.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224
WP No. 201775 of 2025
HC-KAR
5. THE COMMISSIONER,
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,
BIDAR-585 401.
6. THE SUPERINTENDING ARCHEOLOGIST
ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA
HAMPI CIRCLE, NEAR AMBEDKAR CIRCLE,
KAMALAPUR, VIJAYNAGAR-585601.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1, R2 AND R4;
SRI. P.S. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. GOURISH S. KHASHAMPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
SRI. SUDHEERSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI FOR R6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A) A
WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27-03-2025 PASSED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY IN FILE NO. REV/NA/CR-
36/2022-23/9156 AS AT ANNEXURE-Z AS ILLEGAL AND
ARBITRARY IN NATURE. B) A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY
OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 10-05-2025 IN FILE NO.
BUDA/TPM/LAYOUT/C.R-11/1998-99/83-86 AS AT ANNEXURE-
Z-2 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AUTHORITY, AS
ILLEGAL AND ARBITRARY IN NATURE. C) ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENT
AUTHORITIES REFRAINING FROM CAUSING ANY
INTERFERENCE IN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT OF
ERECTION OF AN IDOL OF SARDAR VALLABH BHAI PATEL AT
SUBJECT LAND SY NO. 69/4D OF ALIYABAD VILLAGE, TQ AND
DIST BIDAR, AND TO PROVIDE EXCESS TO THE SUBJECT LAND
BY REMOVING THE PORTION OF ILLEGAL COMPOUND WALL
CONSTRUCTED COVERING THE SUBJECT LAND. D) PASS ANY
ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN
THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING
THE COSTS OF THE PRESENT PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224
WP No. 201775 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL) Petitioner, a society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, under the name and style of 'Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel Pratisthan' represented by its president is before the Court seeking following reliefs:-
a) A writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to quash the impugned order dated 27-03-2025 passed by the 2nd respondent authority in file No.REV/NA/CR-36/2022-
23/9156 as at Annexure-Z, as illegal and arbitrary in nature.
b) A writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to quash the impugned order dated 10-05-2025 in file No.BUDA/TPM/LAYOUT/CR-11/1998-99/83- 86 as at Annexure-Z-2 issued by the 3rd respondent authority, as illegal and arbitrary in nature.
c) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondent authorities refraining from causing any interference in implementation of the project of erection of an idol of 'Saradar Vallabh Bhai Patel' at subject land in Sy.No.68/4D of Aliyabad Village, Tq: and Dist: Bidar and to provide excess to the subject land by removing the portion of illegal compound wall constructed covering the subject land.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
02. The case of the petitioner is that land in Sy.Nos.69/2, 69/3 and 69/4 totally measuring 08 acres 28 guntas all situated at Aliyabad Village, Bidar District and Taluk, originally belonged to one Hawappa s/o Madappa. That there was bifurcation of aforesaid lands, duly reflected in the survey records in Form No.10 as per order dated 27.11.1992.
03. Land in Sy.No.69/4 was further bifurcated by assigning Sy.No.69/4A, 4B, 4C and 4D. That an extent of 04 guntas in Sy.No.69/4C and 12 guntas in Sy.No.69/4D was reflected in the name of one Smt. Sushilabai w/o Hawappa and Form No.10 was prepared on 25.05.2004 as per the orders passed in the proceedings in file No.RRT/Phodi/38/04-05.
04. That the original owner Hawappa s/o Madappa had secured change of land usage in Sy.No.69/2 measuring 03 acres 20 guntas and Sy.No.69/4 measuring 04 guntas in terms of order dated 21.07.1998 of the -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner. That the said Hawappa had also obtained approval of a layout plan from the office of respondent No.3 vide order dated 26.04.2005 in respect of aforesaid lands in Sy.No.69/2 and Sy.No.69/4C measuring 03 acres 24 guntas.
05. That after the due approval of the layout, certain portions of the land reserved for common amenities such as site, park and roads etc., were duly handed over to respondent No.3 - authority in terms of registered deed of relinquishment/release dated 18.04.2005.
06. The aforesaid bifurcation of land in Sy.No.69/4 in Form No.10 by respondent No.4 - ADLR was called in question before the DDLR, Bidar by one Mahananda W/o Shankarappa Chaluva, which came to be allowed by an order dated 31.03.2008 setting aside the bifurcation.
07. That the said Smt. Sushilabai, being the owner of the land had donated 04 guntas of land in Sy.No.69/C -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR in favour of respondent - State represented by respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner for the purpose of installation of 18 feet tall idol of 'Sardar Valabh Bhai Patel' in terms of Deed of Gift dated 09.06.2017. That since the said extent of 04 guntas of land in Sy.No.69/4C was already a part of approved layout being shown as open space and not the portion which was surrendered/released in favour of respondent No.3-authority, a Deed of Rectification was executed by original owner Smt. Sushilabai rectifying the survey number as Sy.No.69/4D instead of Sy.No.69/4C vide Deed of Rectification dated 26.10.2017 and enclosed a map identifying the portion which is sought to be gifted under the document.
08. That the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner, Bidar was pleased to assign the said land in Sy.No.69/4D measuring 4 guntas in favour of petitioner- society with a direction to implement the project and to look after the affairs vide order dated 22.03.2018. Pursuant to which the office of respondent No.5 had duly -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR mutated the name of the petitioner in the municipal records identifying the extent of property as 2831.25 sqft.
09. That since the said land is abutting the land acquired by respondent No.6-Archeological Survey of India in Sy.No.101 of Chidri Village a joint survey was conducted through the office of ADLR and respondent No.6 - ASI on 08.11.2019 and a detailed panchanama was also drawn reflecting the portion of land of the petitioner and report was submitted on 21.12.2019, which was accepted by respondent No.6 - ASI.
10. That after due identification of the portion of land in the joint survey conducted by the office of ADLR and respondent No.6 - ASI, petitioner requested for providing an access to the said land since a compound wall is erected enclosing the portion of the land under bonafide belief that the said portion of land in Sy.No.69/4D forms part of the property of respondent No.6 - ASI. -8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
11. In response to the said representation, the respondent No.6-ASI submitted written explanation to the jurisdictional police contending that the respondent No.6- ASI has not constructed the compound wall enclosing surrounding the portion of property claimed by the petitioner. But the same is constructed by the District Administration.
12. In the meanwhile the Office of the respondent No.3-authority issued a communication dated 27.10.2022 addressed to respondent No.2 claiming that the portion of land in Sy.No.69/4C, was reserved as 'open space' in the approved layout plan and that the phodi map prepared by the office of respondent No.4 under Form No.10 has been duly cancelled vide order dated 31.03.2008 of the DDLR and therefore, there is no land available with Smt. Sushilabai either in Sy.No.No.69/4C or in Sy.No.69/4D, which is purportedly gifted for the purpose of installation of the idol without bringing to the notice of respondent -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR No.3 - authority. Therefore, sought for necessary action in the matter.
13. That in view of the continued interference and obstruction created by the respondent No.3-authority for the purpose of implementation of the project by recommending for cancellation of the subject land allotted to the petitioner and filing repeated complaints before the jurisdictional police preventing the petitioner from carrying out any activity over the subject land, the petitioner made a detailed representation to the respondent No.2 on 04.02.2022.
14. The respondent No.2 without enquiring into the correctness of the claim made by the respondent No.3- authority and without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner had proceeded to pass the order dated 27.10.2022 (Annexure-R) withdrawing the earlier order dated 22.03.2018 assigning the land in Sy.No.69/4D, measuring 4 guntas to the petitioner-society on the
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR premise that there is no land existing as claimed by the petitioner in Sy.No.69/4D, in view of bifurcation having been already cancelled by the order of DDLR.
15. It is further contented that original owner Smt. Sushilabai did not have any land in her ownership or possession to convey any portion thereof by way of gift deed in favour of the Government for the purpose of installation the idol. As such, the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner had no authority to assign the land in favour of the petitioner-society.
16. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 27.10.2022 passed by the respondent No.2, petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.202961/2023 and this Court by an interim order dated 30.10.2023 had permitted petitioner-society to perform birth anniversary on 31.10.2023 on the subject land in Sy.No.69/4D and had also directed authorities to monitor the law and order situation by giving necessary protection and security. That
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR the said writ petition was subsequently allowed by an order dated 23.10.2024 setting aside the order dated 27.10.2022 and remitting the matter to the respondent No.2 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law and directed to conclude the proceedings within a period of three months thereby reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit its pleadings, documents and replies.
17. That the petitioner after the remand had submitted detailed representation with all necessary documents for consideration to establish the claim of the society over the extent of 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.69/4D. The respondent No.2 based on the grievance urged by the petitioner, directed for conducting survey of the land in Sy.No.69/4 to identify the location of Sy.No.69/4C and Sy.No.69/4D. That the survey was accordingly conducted by the DDLR, who submitted a detailed report dated 31.12.2024 identifying the portion of land in Sy.No.69/4D and also portion of Sy.No.69/4C.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
18. That based on the representation made by the petitioner, the respondent No.3-authority vide communication dated 05.04.2025 had acknowledged that the portion of land in Sy.No.69/4C shown as "proposed open space" in the approved layout plan has not been handed over to respondent No.3 as per the Release Deed dated 08.08.2006.
19. Things stood thus, the respondent No.2- authority without considering the contentions raised and without even looking into the records furnished by the petitioner-society or the report submitted by DDLR had proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 27.03.2025 to hold that there exists no land measuring 4 guntas in Sy.No.69/4D belonging to Smt. Sushilabai as she had already surrendered the same to respondent No.3 - authority on 26.04.2005 while approval to the layout plan was being granted to an extent of 3 acres 24 guntas. That the petitioner had no right to claim any relief regarding passage for the purpose of Prathishthana and since
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR respondent No.3 - authority is not party to the gift deed, the petitioner had not acquired any title over the portion of the land as claimed by and proceeded to reject the claim of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court.
20. Sri. Ravi B. Patil, learned counsel reiterating the grounds urged in the memorandum of petition submitted that the land which was subject matter of conversion and approved layout plan was Sy.No.69/2 and Sy.No.69/4C totally measuring 3 acres 24 guntas and not Sy.No.69/4D, which measures 4 guntas and the said portion of 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.69/4D is independent and separate from the land in Sy.No.69/2 and Sy.No.69/4C. He submits though the bifurcation of these lands was set aside/cancelled earlier by DDLR, the dispute was only in respect of Sy.No.69/4A and 69/4B and there was no dispute in respect of Sy.No.69/4D. He submits that the dispute in respect of Sy.No.69/4A and 69/4B having been
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR resolved, the authorities have continued the other bifurcation as was done earlier.
21. He further submits when once the respondent No.2 by order dated 22.03.2018 had accorded permission to the petitioner-society to implement the project of installation of the idol on the subject land, the said order could not have been recalled as found at Annexure-R4 by respondent No.2 as he had become functus officio and in the absence of any power to review its own order, the said order is unsustainable.
22. As regards the dispute concerning the very existence of the land, he refers to survey sketch produced at page No.157 and submits that as per the sketch prepared by the ADLR, the portion marked in the orange colour is the subject land situated in between the compound wall constructed by the District Administrative Authority and the steel poles erected by the respondent No.6 - Archaeological Department. He submits that the
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR said 4 guntas of land is not within the area earmarked by the respondent No.6-ASI. That the said 4 guntas of land is not within the area earmarked by respondent No.6 installing the steel poles. That since the subject land is separately identified all that is required is to provide an access/opening through the compound wall constructed by the District Administrative Authority. Hence, he submits that the respondent-authorities be directed to provide an access as sought for in this petition.
23. AS regards the reasoning assigned by the respondent No.2 in the impugned order on Smt. Sushilabai not having any right over the subject land as she had executed Release Deed in favour of the respondent No.3 - authority while obtaining the layout plan is concerned, he submits that the layout plan was in respect of Sy.No.69/2 and 69/4C and nothing to do with the Sy.No.69/4D and that land in Sy.No.69/4D always remained and continued to be the property of Smt. Sushilabai. Thus, on these counts he submits that the petition be allowed.
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
24. Alternately he submits that the respondent No.2 be directed to identify 04 guntas of land claimed by the petitioner in Sy.No.69/4D with reference to survey sketch at Page No.157 and that if it is found to be within the boundaries of land belonging to respondent No.6 - ASI, the petitioner be reserved liberty to seek substantial remedy in accordance with law.
25. In response, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the very dispute in the petition is with regard to existence and identification property and also with regard to right and interest of Smt. Sushilabai. He submits that such disputed questions of facts cannot be gone into in this writ petition. As such, the petitioner be relegated to appropriate forum to establish their right. He further submits that Smt. Sushilabhai who claims to be the owner of the property is not before the Court and the petitioner has no locus standi to raise the dispute on her behalf.
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
26. In response to the content of survey sketch, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the reading of the said survey sketch indicate that the land being claimed by the petitioner falls within the limits of the land in possession of respondent No.6. That compound wall referred to in the said survey sketch belong to the respondent No.6-ASI. Therefore, there is no question of said land being in existence independently and there is no obligation on the part of the respondent-authorities to provide any access. Hence, seeks for dismissal of petition.
27. Heard. Perused the records.
28. From the narration of facts and the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the dispute appears to be with regard to the claim in respect of 04 guntas of land forming part of Sy.No.69/4D, which according to the petitioner is still available and existing abutting the property belonging to the respondent No.6- ASI. On the other hand, according to the impugned order
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR passed by the respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner, Smt. Sushilabai had no right over the said 04 guntas of land as she having conveyed the said extent of land in terms of Release Deed dated 18.04.2005 while obtaining the sanction plan in favour of respondent No.3 - authority. Therefore, there is no question of she gifting the same in favour of the State in terms of Deed of Gift dated 0.06.2017.
29. Though, the aforesaid controversy would go to the very root of right, title and interest of Smt. Sushilabai over the said 04 guntas of land in Sy.No.64/D, requiring adjudication in a properly constituted suit, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the respondent No.2 be directed to identify the said 04 guntas of land with reference to survey sketch prepared by the ADLR produced at Page No.157 of the writ petition and that if the land is not available petitioner would seek other remedy in
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR accordance with law, this Court inclines to show indulgence to the limited extent of identifying the land.
30. The survey sketch produced at Page No.157 of the writ petition was prepared by the ADLR subsequent to remand order passed by this Court in W.P.No.202961/2023, whereby this Court had directed the Deputy Commissioner to consider the matter afresh. Perusal of the said survey sketch indicate, reference to 04 guntas of land as shown in orange colour and the explanation given therein, reads as under:
"«ªÀgt À :É ªÀiÁ£Àå f¯Áè¢Pü ÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ©ÃzÀg À À gÀªg À À ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀASÉå PÀA/¨sÀÆ¥À/¹Dgï/2024-25 ¢.15.11.2024 gÀ DzÉñÀzA À vÉ C¼ÀvÉ PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ.
ªÀiÁ£Àå ¨sÀÆzÁR¯ÉU¼ À À G¥À¤zÉÃð±ÀPgÀ ÀÄ, ©ÃzÀgÀ gÀªg À À ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀA.PÀA/vÁA/EvÀg/É ¹Dgï/-177/2024-25 gÀ ¢.19.11.2024 gÀ DzÉñÀzA À vÉ C¼ÀvÉ PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ.
(blue colour) F §tÚzÀ UÀÄgÀÄvÀÄ ©ÃzÀgÀ vÁ®ÆQ£À C°AiÀiÁ¨ÁzÀ UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¸Àªð É £ÀA.69 gÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå f¯Áè¢Pü ÁjUÀ¼À DzÉñÀz°À è ¸ÀªðÉ £ÀA. 69/2 gÀ°è «¸ÀÃÛ tð 03 JPÀgÀÉ 20 UÀÄAmÉ EzÀÄÝ, ¨sÀÆzÁR¯ÉU¼ À À ¸ÀªðÉ £ÀA.69/2© «¸ÀÛÃtð 3 JPÀgÀÉ 20 UÀÄAmÉ EgÀÄvÀÛz.É EzÀg° À è C£ÉÃPÀ ªÀÄ£ÉU¼À ÀÄ PÀlÖqU À ¼ À ÀÄ, CAUÀrUÀ¼ÀÄ, gÀ¸ÀÛU É ¼ À ÀÄ, ¥ÁPÀð SÁ° ¤ªÉñÀ£U À ¼ À ÀÄ EgÀÄvÀÛªÉ.
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR (orange colour) F §tÚzÀ UÀÄgÀÄvÀÄ ©ÃzÀgÀ vÁ®ÆQ£À C°AiÀiÁ¨ÁzÀ UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¸Àªð É £ÀA.69 gÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå f¯Áè¢üPÁjUÀ¼À DzÉñÀzÀAvÉ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA.69/4gÀ°è «¹ÛÃtð 0 JPÀgÉ 04 UÀÄAmÉ. d«ÄãÀÄ, ¸ÀA§Azs¥ À l À Ö E¯ÁSÉAiÀĪÀgÀÄ ¥ÀºÀt »qÀĪÀ½zÁgÀgÀÄ vÉÆÃj¹zÀAvÉ C¼ÀvÉ ªÀiÁrzÁUÀ ¸Àzj À d«ÄãÀÄ ¨sÁgÀwÃAiÀÄ ¥ÀÅgÁvÀvÀé E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ PÀA¥ËAqÀ M¼ÀUqÀ É PÀ©âtzÀ PÀA§UÀ¼À ªÀÄzsÀåzÀ°è SÁ° d«ÄãÀÄ EgÀÄvÀz Û É. EzÀgÀ «¹Ûtð 0 JPÀgÉ 05 UÀÄAmÉ 12 DPÁgÀ EgÀÄvÀz Û .É ¸ÀzjÀ d«ÄãÀÄ ¨sÁgÀwÃAiÀÄ ¥ÀÅgÁvÀvÀé E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ PÉÃAzÀæ ¨sÀƪÀiÁ¥ÀPg À ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ f¯Áèq½ À vÀzÀ vÁ®ÆPÀÄ ¨sÀƪÀiÁ¥ÀPgÀ ÀÄ, dAn ¸ÀªÉð ªÀiÁr vÀ£Àß ¨sÀÆ«ÄAiÀÄ ¸Àgº À zÀ ÀÝ£ÀÄß UÀÄgÀÄvÀÄ ªÀiÁr UÀrAiÀÄ°è PÀ©âtzÀ PÀA§UÀ¼£ À ÀÄß ºÁQPÉÆArzÀÄÝ PÀAqÀħgÀÄvÀz Û .É µÀgÁ: IÄt £ÀA.1,2,3,4 ©ÃzÀgÀ £ÀUg À Á©üªÀÈ¢Þ ¥Áæ¢Pü ÁgÀ ©ÃzÀgÀ gÀªg À À 2005gÀ C£ÀĪÉÆâvÀ ¯ÉÃOlzÀ°è ¸Àªð É £ÀA.69/4D £ÀªÀÄÆzÁVgÀÄvÀz Û .É EzÀgÀ°è IÄt £ÀA.6.2,3,7 gÀ¸ÉÛ EgÀÄvÀz Û É ºÁUÀÆ IÄt £ÀA.1,6,7,4 d«ÄãÀÄ ¨sÁgÀwÃAiÀÄ ¥ÀÅgÁvÀvÀé E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ PÀA¥ËAqÀ M¼ÀUq À É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀ©âtzÀ PÀA§UÀ¼À ªÀÄzsÀåzÀ°è EgÀÄvÀÛz.É EzÀgÀ «¹Ûtð 0 JPÀgÉ -05 UÀÄAmÉ- 12DPÁgÀ EzÀgÀ .¥ÀǪÀð ¢QÌUÀÉ IÄt £ÀA.4.3,5 ¸ÀªÀÉð £ÀA. 69/4¹ JAzÀÄ EgÀÄvÀz Û É.
*ªÀiÁ£Àå UËgÀªÁ¤évÀ GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀz° À è «ªÁ¢vÀ d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß ¸Àªð É £ÀA.69/4r £ÀªÀÄƹzÀÄÝ EzÀgÀ ¥ÀǪÀðPÉÌ ¸Àªð É £ÀA.
69/4¹ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ."
31. Thus, reading of the above said explanation indicates that the extent of 4 guntas of land being claimed by the petitioner as belonging to Smt. Sushilabai, forming part of Sy.No.69/4D is situated and lying vacate inside the compound wall of respondent No.6 - ASI and in between the iron poles.
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
32. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the above insisted the compound wall referred to in the survey sketch as above has been constructed by the District Administrative Authority which covers the land subject matter of the layout. The steel poles erected by respondent No.6 - ASI indicate the boundaries of its land. In between these two exists 04 guntas being claimed by the petitioner.
33. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction.
ORDER
1) Petitioner shall make a representation before the respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner along with survey sketch produced at Annexure-X at page Nos.156 and 157 to the writ petition within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
2) The respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner on receipt of such representation shall seek clarification from the DDLR as well as the respondent No.6 - ASI as to whether the said 04 guntas of land shown in orange colour of the said survey sketch being claimed by the petitioner is indeed situated in between the compound wall put up by the District Administrative Authority and the steel poles erected by respondent No.6 - ASI or within the boundaries of land belonging to respondent No.6-ASI.
3) If it is found that the said piece of land is outside the land belonging to respondent No.6 - ASI as well as outside the land enclosed by a compound wall put up by the District Administrative Authority, respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner shall consider the representation of the
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR petitioner for providing access to the said piece of land, in accordance with law.
4) Alternatively if it is found that there is no existence of 04 guntas of land in Sy.No.69/4D as claimed by the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to seek such remedy as may be available and permissible under law by having recourse to seek substantial relief before a competent Court of law.
5) The respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner shall undertake this exercise of identifying the land as directed and communicate the outcome to the petitioners in writing within an outer limit of 60 days from the date of submission of representation by the petitioner.
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6224 WP No. 201775 of 2025 HC-KAR
6) It is made clear that no order is passed in this writ petition regarding validity or otherwise of the order dated 27.03.2025 (Annexure-Z) and the order dated 10.05.2025 (Annexure-Z2) impugned in this petition. The same are subject to outcome of the direction issued regarding identification of 04 gunstas of land as above.
With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(M.G.S.KAMAL) JUDGE KJJ,SDU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 1 CT:PK