IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.50136 OF 2019 (KLR-LG) BETWEEN :
SRINIKETANA TRUST (R) SRI SAMPUTA NARASIMHA SWAMY SRI SUBRAHMANYA MATHA SUBRAHMANYA-574 238 SULLIA TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY SRI. SANTHOSH R EXECUTIVE OFFICER S/O SRI. RAMA AMMINNAYA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.40, 3RD MAIN T.R. NAGAR-560 028 BENGALURU …PETITIONER (BY SHRI. GAUTHAM S. BHARDWAJ FOR SHRI. M. ARUNA SHYAM, ADVOCATES) AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY 3RD FLOOR, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDINGS DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOREST, ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDINGS DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 5. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST ARANYA BHAVAN (TERRITORIAL) SANKEY TANK, CHOWDAIAH ROAD 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 003 6. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS BENGALURU URBAN DIVISION SANKEY TANK, CHOWDAIAH ROAD 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 003 7. THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU EAST TALUK K.R. PURAM BENGALURU-560 036 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. Y.D. HARSHA, AGA) . . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING FOR A DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS TO DROP/CLOSE THE PROPOSAL FOR DECLARING THE GRANTED LAND DEEMED FOREST THEREBY DECLARING THAT THE GRANT ORDER DATED 12.07.2012 PASSED BY R-2 (PRODUCED AT ANNX-A) SHALL BE DEEMED TO INCLUDE THE CONCESSION OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO ALL THE TREES GROWING IN THE SAID LAND AND THE PETITIONER IS THE OCCUPANT IN RELATION TO THE STANDING TREES ON THE SAID GRANTED LAND AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard Shri.Gautham S.Bhardwaj, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri.Y.D.Harsha, learned AGA for the State.
2. Petitioner has presented this writ petition inter alia with a prayer to direct respondents to drop/close proposal for declaring the granted land as ‘Deemed Forest land’ and that the trees in the granted land deem to have been included in the grant.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are, petitioner was granted gomal land measuring 5 acres in Sy. No.108 of Gunjuru village, Varthuru Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, in exercise of powers under Section 97(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1966, by order dated 12th July 2012 in G.O. No.RD 432 LGB 2011.
4. Shri.Gautham S.Bhardwaj, for the petitioner–Trust submitted that pursuant to the grant, petitioner has paid Rs.1,25,00,055/- and petitioner has been put in possession of the land in question. He further submitted that despite the grant, the Forest Officials are trying to interfere with petitioner’s possession and enjoyment of the land. Accordingly, this writ petition has been presented with the aforesaid prayer and also a further prayers to direct respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of land in question and a direction to grant permission to cut and dispose of the trees standing in the subject land.
5. Shri.Gautham, submitted that though the grant is made pursuant to a Government Order issued by order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, by communication dated 21st May 2016 to the Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Ecology & Environment Department has requested to take action to cancel the grant by stating that the lands in question and two other grants have been made illegally. He argued that when the grant is made by the Government, the Sub- ordinate Officers cannot declare the grant as illegal.
6. Shri.Harsha, learned AGA has filed his statement of objections and the same is taken on record. Learned AGA submitted that the communication dated 21st May 2016 between the Deputy Conservator of Forests and the Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Ecology & Environment Department is an inter-office correspondence and no final order is impugned in the writ petition, which may meet the petitioner with any civil consequence. Therefore, the writ petition is misconceived. He further contended that the State has filed an Affidavit in the Supreme Court stating that 8.37 acres of land is a forest land.
7. I have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.
8. In paragraph No.11 of the writ petition, petitioner has stated that the Forest officials are interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession. Shri.Gautham, has placed reliance on paragraph No.7 of the decision in the case of The Deputy Commissioner, Chickmagalur and others Vs. Shri.Aravind and another reported in ILR 2015 KAR 4631 and contended that unless the Government had retained any right in the trees standing on the land, the occupant must be presumed to be the owner of the trees.
9. Undisputed facts of the case are, by the Government order noted above, land has been granted in favour of the Trust. The said executive order is passed by order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka. In such circumstances, the declaration by a Subordinate Officer that the land granted is illegal, to say the least, is not desirable.
10. Be that as it may, as on date, the grant order is in force. So long the grant order is in force, the Government Officials shall give effect to the order passed by the Government and act in aid of the same. Learned AGA is right in his submission that there is no order impugned in this writ petition, which is affecting the grant in any manner. However, in respect of the specific averment made in paragraph No.11 of the writ petition and the law laid down in The Deputy Commissioner, Chickmagalur and others Vs. Shri.Aravind and another reported in ILR 2015 KAR 4631, so long as the grant is in force, any subordinate Officer of the state shall not interfere with the rights of grantees.
11. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the above observations and a direction is issued to the State Government officials not to interfere with the petitioner’s rights as long as the grant is in force. Petitioner’s request made in Annexures ‘E’ and ‘E1’ shall be considered in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Petition disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE SPS