Karnataka High Court
Govindappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 February, 2024
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:6568
WP No. 40632 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO.40632 OF 2018 (KLR-LG)
BETWEEN:
1. GOVINDAPPA
S/O LATE SRI THIRUMALEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
2. H C NADAKERIGOWDA
S/O LATE SRI CHIKKARANGEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
3. LAKSHMANA H K
S/O LATE SRI KEMPALINGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
4. RAMESH
Digitally signed by S/O LATE SRI PATHIYAPPA,
KRISHNAPPA LAXMI
YASHODA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 5. SRINIVASAMURTHY
S/O SRI VENKATEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
6. LOKESH
S/O SRI RAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
7. RAVI
S/O SRI BASAVANTHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:6568
WP No. 40632 of 2018
8. NEELAKANTACHAR
S/O LATE SRI MUDDULINGACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
ALL RE R/O K HARIVESANDRA VILLAGE,
HINDASAGERE POST, KASABA HOBLI,
GUBBI TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572213.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRADEEP NAIK K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
TUMKUR DISTRICT,
TUMKUR-572102
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
TUMKUR SUB DIVISION,
TUMKUR-572102
4. THE THAHASILDHAR
GUBBI TALUK, GUBBI,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-5722132
5. THE LAND GRANT COMMITTEE
REP BY ITS PRESIDENT,
GUBBI TALUK, GUBBI,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572213
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:6568
WP No. 40632 of 2018
6. SRI RANGASWAMY
S/O SRI LAKKANNA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
7. CHINNAGIRAIAH
S/O SRI THIMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
8. SRI KEMPARANGAIAH
S/O SRI THIRUMALAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
9. SRI GANGADHARAIAH
S/O SRI BAASAVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
10. SRI LAKSHMINARASAIAH
S/O NARASIMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
11. SRI NARASIMHAMURTHY
S/O SRI GANGADHARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
12. SRI KRISHNE GOWDA
S/O SRI GANGADHARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
13. RAMACHANDRAIAH
S/O SRI CHANNEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
14. SMT MAYAMMA
W/O SRI THANDAVACHARI,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:6568
WP No. 40632 of 2018
15. SRI CHIKKANARASIAH
S/O SRI NARASIMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
THE RESPONDENTS NO.6 TO 15
ARE R/O K HARIVESANDRA VILLAGE,
HINDASAGERE POST,
KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572213.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SESHU.V., HCGP FOR R1 TO R5
SRI. A.V.GANGADHARAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR
R9, R11 & R12
R7, R8, R10, R13, R14, & R15
ARE SERVED-UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW
THIS W.P. QUSAH ANNX-A PASSED BY THE R-5 SPECIFICALLY
ORDER DTD 14.03.2018 AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER FOR
THE REASONS MENTIONED ABOVE BY TAKING INTO
CONSIDERATION OF ILLEGAL ENCROACHMENT OF
GOVERNMENT SOCIAL FOREST LAND, THE INTERIM ORDER
MAY KINDLY BE PASSED, STAYING THE OPERATION OF ANNX-
A PASSED BY THE R-5 DATED 14.03.2018, PARTICULARLY
GRANT ORDER DTD 14.03.2018.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:6568
WP No. 40632 of 2018
ORDER
R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
On the previous occasion, this Court had made some observations regarding the provisions contained in Section 94-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, while pointing out that the rigorous contained in the Karnataka Land Grant Rules such as specific orders to be passed by the Deputy Commissioner to reduce the extent of gomal and that only such lands which are dereserved would be made available for grant may not be applicable in respect of the orders that are to be passed under Section 94-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, learned counsel for the petitioner sought for some time to secure instructions and make submissions.
2. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a memo stating that the petitioners intend to file a Public Interest Litigation in this regard and therefore the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:6568 WP No. 40632 of 2018
3. The memo is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn while reserving liberty to the petitioners to file a Public Interest Litigation, if so advised on the same cause of action.
Sd/-
JUDGE KLY CT: JL