RAMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL

W.P. NO.47747/2017 C/W W.P.NOs.433/2017, 10728/2017, 15532/2017, 16281/2017, 17180/2017, 21279/2017, 23095/2017, 23800/2017, 25219/2017, 27437/2017, 27573/2017, 32134/2017, 32849/2017, 33085/2017, 34202/2017, 35384/2017, 36324/2017, 36610/2017, 36640/2017, 36690/2017, 36760/2017, 37713/2017, 40597/2017, 41593/2017, 42959/2017, 43059/2017, 43227/2017, 44273/2017, 44687/2017, 45114/2017, 47887/2017, 50674/2017, 51160/2017, 52972/2017, 53008/2017, 54035/2017, 54081/2017, 54082/2017, 55683/2017, 56296/2017, 235/2018, 463/2018, 777/2018, 1348/2018, 1395/2018, 3032/2018, 3641/2018, 4729/2018, 5389/2018, 5390/2018, 5391/2018, 5704/2018, 6061/2018, 6330/2018, 6376/2018, 6583/2018, 6960/2018, 7868/2018, 8035/2018, 8186/2018, 8187/2018, 8189/2018, 8190/2018, 8191/2018, 8210/2018, 8585/2018, 9116/2018, 9117/2018, 9194/2018, 11029/2018, 11306/2018, 11767/2018, 11973/2018, 11975/2018, 12264/2018, 12614/2018, 13112/2018, 14215/2018, 14390/2018, R

15257/2018, 15270/2018, 18327/2018, 18329/2018, 18646/2018, 19751/2018, 19761/2018, 22025/2018, 22817/2018, 22837/2018, 23435/2018, 23437/2018, 23819/2018, 25761/2018, 25768/2018, 26054/2018, 26481/2018, 26545/2018, 26546/2018, 27912/2018, 28214/2018, 28215/2018, 28637/2018, 29281/2018, 32121/2018, 33339/2018, 33741/2018, 34292/2018, 34675/2018, 35489/2018, 36459/2018, 36539/2018, 36737/2018, 36863/2018, 39179/2018, 40311/2018, 41277/2018, 43275/2018, 43352/2018, 45660/2018, 47066/2018, 47540/2018, 47543/2018, 47827/2018, 47841/2018, 49013/2018,49786/2018, 50668/2018, 51528/2018, 52017/2018, 52106/2018, 53025/2018, 53049/2018, 53204/2018, 53534/2018, 53830/2018, 54914/2018, 55172/2018, 55214/2018, 56168/2018, 56187/2018, 56410/2018, 56539/2018, 56542/2018, 56545/2018, 56630/2018, 56631/2018, 56731/2018, 56988/2018, 57174/2018, 302/2019, 1660/2019, 1680/2019, 2960/2019, 3463/2019, 3484/2019, 5393/2019, 5576/2019, 7440/2019, 7844/2019, 8176/2019, 8298/2019, 8821/2019, 8852/2019, 9158/2019, 10906/2019, 11090/2019, 11091/2019, 12900/2019, 12974/2019, 12975/2019, 13029/2019,13280/2019, 13405/2019, 13737/2019, 14457/2019, 18151/2019, 20311/2019, 20312/2019, 20313/2019, 20314/2019, 20315/2019, 20316/2019, 22667/2019, 22678/2019, 22935/2019, 22988/2019, 23515/2019, 23573/2019, 27336/2019, 27597/2019, 27625/2019, 27680/2019, 27730/2019, 27921/2019,

28421/2019, 28900/2019, 29471/2019, 29604/2019, 29668/2019, 30073/2019, 30187/2019, 31106/2019, 31107/2019, 31322/2019, 31349/2019, 31350/2019, 32184/2019, 33249/2019, 33262/2019, 34572/2019, 35277/2019, 35575/2019, 35579/2019, 36127/2019, 38110/2019, 38701/2019, 38895/2019, 40447/2019, 40448/2019, 40450/2019, 41715/2019, 41716/2019, 42273/2019, 45583/2019, 50244/2019, 50781/2019, 50828/2019, 50955/2019, 50956/2019, 51043/2019, 51101/2019, 51638/2019, 51710/2019, 51830/2019, 51878/2019, 51879/2019, 51926/2019, 51941/2019, 51944/2019, 51945/2019, 51961/2019, 52011/2019, 52032/2019, 52134/2019, 52566/2019, 52609/2019, 220/2020, 3190/2020, 9647/2020, 12647/2020 (KLGP)

IN W.P.NO.47747/2017:

BETWEEN:

SHRIRAM PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.123, ANGAPPA NAICKAN STREET CHENNAI AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT: 3RD FLOOR, MOOKAMIBA COMPLEX, NO.4, LADY DESIKACHARY ROAD, CHENNAI - 560 004 REPRESENTED BY K. VAIDYANATHAN.

AND BRANCH AT:

NO.40/43, NAGASHREE CHAMBERS 4TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN, SADASHIVA NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 090

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. AJESH KUMAR S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR

VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER

T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD

KUMAR PARK WEST

BENGALURU - 560 020.

3 . BENGALURU BRUHAT MAHANAGARA PALIKE

BY ITS COMMISSIONER, N.R. CIRCLE

BANGALORE - 560 002.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011 AS THE ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT VIOLATES THE PETITIONER'S RIGHT FOR A FREE AND FAIR TRIAL GUARANTEED UNDER ARTICLE 21 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P.NO.433/2017:

BETWEEN:

M/S SHAKTHI HILL RESORTS PVT. LTD., BEML LAYOUT, RAJARAJESHWARI

NAGAR,OFF MYSORE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 098 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN SRI. R. ARUNACHALAM AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS. ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. J.M. RAJANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE AND QUASH SECTION 11 OF THE KARNATAKA ACT NO.38/2014 AS ULTRA VIRES AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL VIDE ANNEXURE-G DATED:20.10.2014 PUBLISHED IN THE KARNATAKA GAZETTE.

IN W.P.NO.10728/2017:

BETWEEN:

SYMBIOSIS SOCIETY A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT SENAPATI BAPAT ROAD, PUNE AND CAMPUS AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT:95/1, 95/2, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, HOSUR ROAD BANGALORE – 560 100 BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. T. SUNIL JACOB. ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ASHOK HARNALLI, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. MANMOHAN P.N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. B.S. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEEDING APPLICANT ON I.A. 1/2018)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA VIDE ANNEX-Q AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P.NO.15532/2017:

BETWEEN:

REMCO(BHEL) HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO.356, 5TH MAIN, RPC (REMCO) LAYOUT HAMPI NAGAR BENGALURU – 560 104 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESINDENT VIJAYAKUMAR S/O LATE GOPALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 AND R-2; SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI. M. SHIVAPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-4 & ALSO FOR R-5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19 AND 21 AND ARTICLE 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P.NO.16281/2017:

BETWEEN:

REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER DR. C.N. PRAKASH.

ALL SONS OF

LATE C.K. NARAYANA GOWDA 1 TO 4 RESIDING AT CHAMAREDDDIHALLI, ALANGUR POST, MULBAGAL TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT. ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. AMARNATH B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

2 . SRI HEMANTHA RAJU S/O LATE MUNI RAJU R/A NO.32, ESHWAR TEMPLE ROAD RAMOHALLI, KENGERI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE - 560 074.

3 . SRI. M.K. AYYAPPA COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, TRANSPORT BUILDING, SHANTI NAGAR BANGALORE – 560027.

4 . JAGADEESH THAHASILDHAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS BANGALORE – 560 009.

5 . SHIVANNA RTD. DEPUTY THAHSILDAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK KANDHAYA BHAVAN BANGALORE.

6 . CHANNEGOWDA RTD. REVENUE INSPECTOR NO.259, 7TH MAIN, SARASWHATHI NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 040.

7 . M/S ASIAN FABTECH LTD FLAT NO.15, 2ND PHASE PEENYA, BANGALORE – 560 058 REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI. K.H. PUTTASHWAMI S/O LATE HONNEGOWDA.

8 . SMT. AKKAYYAMMA D/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILALGE KENGERI HOBLI.BANGALORE.

9 . SMT. PADHMAMMA D/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE, TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

10 . SRI. YELLAPPA D/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE, TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

11 . SMT. GOWRAMMA D/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

12 . SRI. RAMESH S/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

13 . SRI. SURESH S/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

14 . SRI. LAKSHMAN S/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

15 . SMT. VIJAYALAKSHIMI D/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

16 . SMT. MUNILAKSHMAMMA D/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

17 . SMT. NEELAMMA D/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

18 . SMT. BHAGYAMMA D/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

19 . SMT. SHARADA D/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS BEHIND YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

20 . SRIRAMA S/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

21 . SMT. DHANALAKSHMI D/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

22 . KANTHARAJU S/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

23 . SMT. AKKAIYAMMA D/O LATE YALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

24 . SMT. MANJULA D/O LATE YALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

25 . SMT. ANUSOOYA D/O LATE YALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

26 . RAJAPPA S/O LATE YALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

27 . SRI. MUNIKRISHNA S/O LATE YALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

28 . SMT. SANJEEVAMMA D/O LATE YALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS BEHING YELLAMMA TEMPLE TIGALARA ROAD, KENGERI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

29 . SRI. K.V. VENKATARANGAIAH S/O M. VENKATANARSIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS DODDABELE VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE – 59.

30 . SRI. P.K. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O. P.V. KRISHNA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NO.414, 2ND STAGE, INDIRANAGARA, BANGALORE – 38.

31 . SMT. SUJATHA W/O LATE K.K. MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NO.4, NAGADEVANAHALLI JNANABHARATHI POST KENGERI UPANAGARA BANGALORE – 560 060.

32 . SRI. H.B. JAYARAM S/O LATE N. BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NO.1519/2, 1ST STAGE 2ND BLOCK, BANASHANKARI BANGALORE – 43.

33 . C.S. VINAY KUMAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS NO.259, 7TH MAIN SARASHWATHINAGAR BANGALORE – 560 040.

34 . SRI. K.V. VENUGOPAL S/O VENKATANARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS DODDABELE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE -59. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1;

SRI. K.N. PUTTEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-7; SRI. H. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-30; SRI. B.R. SATISH, ADVOCATE FOR R-33; R-2, R-6, R-7 AND R-32 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED NOTICE DISPENSED WITH FOR R-3 TO R-5 R-8 TO R-29 & R-31 & R-34)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.LGC(B)20/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE LAND GRABBING, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE, AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN.

IN W.P.NO.17180/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. MUDDAVEERAPPA S/O LATE MUDDAVEEREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/O BASAVESHWARANAGARA 16TH WARD, OLD SOAP FACTORY ROAD KANAKAPURA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIDHANA SOUDHA]

BENGALURU – 560 001.

KANAKAPURA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 562 159.

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. N. SUBBA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE FILE OF THE R-4 TAHSILDAR, KANAKAPURA TALUK, KANAKAPURA IN RELATED TO THE LANDS BEARING SY. NOS.28, 29 AND 31 OF KEERANAGERE VILLAGE, MARALAVADI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK AND ALSO THE RECORDS FROM THE FILE OF THE R-2 IN RELATED TO CASE LGC(P) NO.34/2016 AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED:23.02.2016 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEX-P.

IN W.P. NO.21279/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. OMKARA ASHRAMA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER SRI. K. BHASKAR SRINIVASPURA GRAMA UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD NEAR B.G.S. HOSPITAL UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU - 560 062. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SUNIL S RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

5 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

HEMMIGEPURA CIRCLE

KENGERI HOBLI

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK.

6 . THE REGISTRAR

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COURT

FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

PROHIBITION, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.10.2016 IN CASE NO.LGC 17/2016 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING ACT, 2011 WHICH IS FOUND AT ANNEXURE-L TO THE W.P.

IN W.P.NO.23095/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. PRAKASHNATH @SHEKARAPPA S/O HONNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS "POOJARI ESTATE" SRINIVASAPURA CROSS UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE - 560 060. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, SR. COUNSEL FOR MS. APARNA N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

ATTACHED TO SPECIAL COUIRT FOR

LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION IN

KARNATAKA, 3RD FLOOR, KANDAYA

BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . SRI. HEMANTH RAJU

S/O MUNIRAJU

MAJOR

NO.32 ESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD

RAMOHALLI, KENGERI HOBLI

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 074.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. D. MALLIKARJUNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R-12)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS LGC (P) 23/2017 DATED 17.01.2017 VIDE ANNEX-A PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING AND PROHIBITION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 23.01.2017 VIDE ANNEX-B TAKING COGNIZANCE IN LGC (P) 23/2017 UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT AND ENTIRE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER.

IN W.P. NO.23800/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT UMA BALAGAVI

W/O MR. T.B. BALAGAVI

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

R/AT NO.120, MIG

K.H.B. COLONY

BASAVESHWARANAGAR

BENGALURU - 560 079.

2 . SHRI. B.N. JAYARAM

S/O LATE NAGAPPA @

DODDANAGAPPA

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

R/AT BYRATHI VILLAGE

BIDARAHALLI HOBLI

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 067.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. D.N. NANJUNDA REDDY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. PRAKASH T HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUIDLING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . SHRI. JUVANES C

S/O LATE Y. CHINNAPPA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

R/AT A-1, 5TH FLOOR

SAI KRUPA APARTMENT

NEAR CHURCH

VISHWANATH NAGENAHALLI

BENGALURU - 560 032.

3 . SHRI. B.A. BASAVARAJ

S/O ANJANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

R/AT BYRATHI VILLAGE

BIDARAHALLI HOBLI

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 067. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. K. HANUMANTHRAYAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; R-3 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.25219/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT. MOTAMMA

W/O VENKATARAMU

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.

2 . MR. GAUTHAM

S/O VENKATARAMU

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.

3 . MR. PREETHAM

S/O VENKATARAMU

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.

ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE

R/A D.NO.47, 4TH CROSS

4TH MAIN, DOLLARS COLONY

MLA LAYOUT, RMV II STAGE

BANGALORE - 560 094.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SIDDHARTH B MUCHANDI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.

2 . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.

3 . TAHASILDHAR

MUDIGERE TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2017 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (S) 197/2017 VIDE ANNEX-A.

IN W.P. NO.27437/2017:

BETWEEN:

SHRI. MUNIRAJU S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT SINGENA AGRAHARA VILLAGE SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRAKASH T HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHASILDAR

ANEKAL TALUK

TALUK OFFICE COMPOUND

ANEKAL, BENGALURU DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2018) HAS NO APPLICATION TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONER'S CASE IN CASE LGC (S) NO.121/2016 BEFORE THE SPECIAL COURT BENGALURU TILL APPLICATION IN FORM NO.523 IS FINALLY DISPOSED OF AT ANNEX-B1.

IN W.P. NO.27573/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . MRS. ROSAMMA VARGHESE

W/O LATE T. VARGHESE VAREED

AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.

2 . MR. GEORGE T VARGHESE

S/O LATE T VARGHESE VAREED

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

TEXLA FARMS, SURVEY NO.42/1

KANIMINIKE VILLAGE

KENGERI HOBLI

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

BENGALURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. KRISHNA B.R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE THASILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVANA

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING (PROHIBITION) ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 30 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRUS TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND /OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.32134/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. G.H. NAGARAJ

S/O LATE G. HANUMANTEGOWDA

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.

2 . SMT. HEMAVATI

W/O G.H. NAGARAJ

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.

3 . SMT. N. TEJASWINI @ JYOTHI

D/O G.H. NAGARAJ

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.

4 . SRI. VINAY @ SHAM

S/O G.H. NAGARAJ

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.

ALL (1TO 4) ARE RESIDENT OF

WARD NO.4, 'MATHRU NILYA'

PRASHANTH NAGAR

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. R. DEVHADAS, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. M. VEERABHADRAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETRY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

& DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT

REVENUE BHAVAN

CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.

3 . THE TAHASILDAR

CHICKBALLAPURA TALUK

REVENUE BHAVAN

CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.

4 . THE COMMISSIONER

THE CHICKBALLAPURA MUNICIPAL

COUNCIL, CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.

5 . SRI. AMEER MOHAMMED SADIQ

S/O LATE K AMMERJAN

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

DINNEHOSAHALLI ROAD

IDSMT LAYOUT, WARD NO.6

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.

6 . SRI. H. SRIRAM

S/O HANUMANTHAPPA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

EX-MUNICIPAL PRESIDENT

WARD NO.30, CHAMARAJPET

SIDLAGATTA ROAD

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.

7 . SRI. RAVICHANDRA KUMAR

S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

WARD NO.29, CHAMARAJPET

SIDLAGATTA ROAD

CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SMT. PUSHPALATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; SRI. MANU KULKARNI, ADVOCATE A/W SMT. SRUSHTI VIJ, ADVOCATE FOR R-5 TO R-7)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT, 38/2014 AS ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 & 300- A AS PER ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.32849/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . DR. SITARAM SHETTY

AGED ABOOUT 60 YEARS

S/O LATE CHARMAKKI NARAYANA SHETTY

R/AT 4/10, MILLERS ROAD

OPPOSITE VIKRAM HOSPITRAL

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . SUMITRA R SHETTY

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

DAUGHTER OF LATE CHARMAKKI

NARAYANA SHETTY

RESIDING AT 65, LAVELLE ROAD

4TH CROSS, BENGALURU - 560 001. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SHRISHAIL NAVALGUND, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF

FORESTS, KOPPA DIVISION

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT NO.38 OF 2014) ANNEXURE-A AS BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 (EQUALITY BEFORE LAW) 20 (PROTECTION IN RESPECT OF CONVICTION FOR OFFENCES) AND 21 (PROTECTION OF LIFE AND PERSONAL OF LIBERTY) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 AND/OR AS BEING OUTSIDE THE COMPETENCE OF THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF KARNATAKA.

IN W.P. NO.33085/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. A.C. ANANTHA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS S/O LATE PATEL CHIKKAHANUMAIAH RESIDING AT AVALAHALLI, KENGERI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560 026. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHADRINATH R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE TAHASILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR PROHIBITION OF LAND GRABBING, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE, AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEX-S.

IN W.P. NO.34202/2017:

BETWEEN:

DR. B. RAMANA RAO S/O LATE B.S. RAMA RAO AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS NO.94/H, 9TH CROSS 13TH MAIN, RAJMAHAL VILAS EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 080.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . NARAYANASWAMY

S/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH

R/O NO.MARUTHI NAGARA

NEAR ANJINEYA SWAMY TEMPLE

MADANAYAKANAHALLI - 560 042

BENGALURU NORTH TALUK.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. CHOKKA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, THE ACT. AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C. (P) NO.234 OF 2017 IN KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING, SPECIAL COURT, KANDAYA BHAVANA, THE SPECIAL COURT, KANDAYA BHAVAN, THE SPECIAL COURT' DATED 03.04.2017 AS PER ANNEX-D IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND TO AWARD COSTS OF THE PETITION.

IN W.P. NO.35384/2017:

BETWEEN:

MR. IRFAN RAZACK S/O LATE SRI. S. RAZACK AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES

PROJECTS LTD., OFFICE AT: THE FALCON HOUSE NO.1, MAIN GUARD CROSS ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. UDAY HOLLA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. MOHUMED SADIQ B.A, ADVOATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

VIDHANA SOUDHA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS

SECRETARY.

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK

MINIVIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE-560 064.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 09.10.2014) IS ILLEGAL AND ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

(ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011.

IN W.P. NO.36324/2017:

BETWEEN:

SMT. V. KRISHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS W/O LATE GOVINDARAJU NO.7, MARAPPA THOTA 2ND CROSS, P.G. ROAD J.C. NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 006.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. NARAYANA SWAMY P.M, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REP BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE COMMISSIONER

BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA

PALIKE, J.C. ROAD

BANGALORE - 560 002.

3 . THE CHIEF ENGINEER

BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA

PALIKE, 9TH FLOOR

JAYANAGAR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX

JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. KEMPANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INIDA BEING VOLATILE OF THE ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.36610/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. S. SOMASHEKARA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

PRESIDENT

BENGALURU AIRPORT CITY

LIONS SERVICE TRUST

MUNNEKOLALU VILLAGE

MARATHALLI POST

BENGALURU - 560 037.

2 . SRI. LINGA REDDY K

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

VICE PRESIDENT

BENGALURU AIRPORT CITY LIONS

SERVICE TRUST, MUNNEKOLALU

VILLAGE MARATHALLI POST

BENGALURU - 560 037.

3 . SRI. KRISHNA REDDY G

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

TREASURER

BENGALURU AIRPORT CITY LIONS

SERVICE TRUST, MUNNEKOLALU

VILLAGE MARATHALLI POST

BENGALURU - 560 037. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HARISH H.V, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

VIDHANA VEEDHI ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

VIKAS SOUDHA

VIDHANA VEEDHI ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE SUO-MOTU PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (S) 238/2016 ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AT ANNEX-A AS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.36640/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. S. ANNEYAPPA S/O LATE SONNELLAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/AT THIGALACHOWDADENAHALLI VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI ANEKAL TLAUK - 562 125. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. KUMAR J.C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

5TH FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL

BENGALURU DISTRICT - 562 106.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.36690/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . RATHEESH NAMBIAR

S/O LATE C.R. NAMBIAR

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

R/AT NO./RFA A64

PURAVA RIVER, MARTHAHALLI

BANGALORE - 560 037.

2 . VISHWANATH REDDY

S/O LATE NARAYANA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

R/AT NAZRAYANAGHATTA VILLAGE

SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK

BANGALORE - 562 106.

3 . N.K. HARISH

S/O LATE N KRISHNA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

NARAYANAGHATTA VILLAGE

SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK

BANGALORE - 562 106.

4 . K. SRINIVAS REDDY

S/O LATE N. KRISHNA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

NARAYANAGHATTA VILLAGE

SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK

BANGALORE - 562 106.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY LAW AND PARLIMENTARY AFFAIRS

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE - 560 001

REP BY CHIEF SECRETARY.

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.,

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001.

3 . TAHSILDAR

ANEKAL TALUK

BANGALORE SOUTH DIVISION

BANGALORE - 562 106. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) ANNEX-C) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF

ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.36760/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. ARUACHALAM S/O LATE SRI. RANGASWAMY MUDALIAR AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS CHAIRMAN M/S SHAKTHI HILL RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BEML LAYOUT RAJARAJESWARINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 039. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. J.M. RAJANNA SETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

HOME DEPARTMENT

HOME COMMISSIONER

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . B.M.T.F. POLICE STATION

CORPORATION BUILDING

J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002

REPRESENTED BY

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT

OF POLICE. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE AT ANNEX-C DATED 24.07.2017 ISSUED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AS DEVOID OF THE AUTHORITY OF LAW.

IN W.P. NO.37713/2017:

BETWEEN:

SMT. SUMITHRA W/O G.T. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS KASABA HOBLI, RURAL GUDIBANDE & GUDIBANDE TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA - 561 207. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. M. SHIVAPRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

STATE OF KARNATAKA

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT

KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD

BANGALORE - 560 001

REPRESENT BY REGISTER.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT

CHIKKABALLAPURA - 561 207.

4 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISIONER

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION

CHIKKABALLAPURA - 561 207

5 . THE TAHSILDAR

GUDIBANDE TALUK OFFICE

GUDIBANDE TALUK

GUDIBANDE, CHIKKABALLAPURA

DISTRICT - 561 207.

6 . SRI. NANJAPPA

S/O VENKATARANAPPA

TAHSILDAR, GUDIBANDE TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA - 561 207.

7 . MAHAMMED ELIYAS

S/O LATE SHAIK FAKRUDDIN

R/AT UPPARAHALLI VILLAGE

KASABA HOBLI, GUDIBANDE TALUK

CHIKKABALLAPURA - 561 207.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP R-1 TO R-5; SRI. CHETHAN KUMAR H, ADVOCATE FOR R-6; SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-7)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED DATED 01.08.2017 BY THE R-2 AT ANNEXURE-M AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED DATED 20.022017 AT ANNEXURE-J PASSED BY THE R-4 AND CONSEQUENTLY TO DIRECT HT ER-3 TO ADJUDICATE AND CONCLUDE THE PROCEEDINGS IN R.A.NO.25/2015-16 ON MERITS.

IN W.P. NO.40597/2017:

BETWEEN:

NARAYANA MURTHY MANAGING TRUSTEE OF HANUMAGIRI PRIVATE TRUST, RESIDING AT # 81 BALAJI NILAYA, 4TH MAIN

POORNA PRAJNA NAGAR 5TH STAGE, BASK BANGALORE - 560 061.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. AJIT P.B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY THE

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BANGALORE - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN

BANGALORE - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) IS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS IT VIOLATES ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.41593/2017:

BETWEEN:

MR. IRFAN RAZACK AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS S/O LATE SRI. S. RAZAK MANAGING DIRECTOR OF

M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS LTD A REGISTERED COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 OFFICE AT:THE FALCON HOUSE" NO.1, MAIN GUARD CROSS ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. UDAY HOLLA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. MOHUMED SADIQ B.A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

VIDHANA SOUDHA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

BANGALORE - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE EAST TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

BANGALOPRE EAST TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

BANGALORE EAST TALUK

K.R. PURAM, BANGALORE - 560 036. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING ACT, 2011 (PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 09.10.2014) IS ILLEGAL AND ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A) AND

CONSEQUENTLY STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011.

IN W.P. NO.42959/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . M/S SRI. NAKODA CONSTRUCTION LTD

OFFICE AT NO.133/1

THE RESIDENCY 10TH FLOOR

RESIDENCY ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 025

REPT. BY ITS DIRECTOR

SRI. MAHAVEER GULECHA

S/O TEJRAJ GULECHA.

2 . SRI. MAHAVEER GULECHA

S/O TEJRAJ GULECHAR

NO.40/A, CLASSIC ORCHARDS

BANNERGHATTA ROAD

BEHIND MEENAKSHI TEMPLE

KOTHANUR BENGALURU - 560 076.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. B.S. RADHANANDAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

SECERTARY TO THE GOVERNMENT.

2 . STATE BY SPECIAL PUBLIC

PROSECUTOR, ATTACHED TO

SPECIAL COURT OF LAND

GRABBING PROHIBITION IN KARNATAKA.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES THE ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19 AD ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.43059/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. BABU R S/O RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT # 323, RAGHVANAPALYA UTTARAPALYA HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK - 560 078. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SURESH DESAI K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

BENGALURU

BENGALURU DISTRICT - 560 009.

4 . N. NAGARAJ

S/O H NARAYANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

R/AT VASANTHPURA

SUBRAMANYA PURA POST

BENGALURU - 560 061. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. ANIL KUMAR J, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 30-A AND OR/IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.43227/2017:

BETWEEN:

M/S SALARPURIA ROPPY REALTORS PVT LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT # 3, 4TH FLOOR SALARPURIA WINDSOR ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU KARNATAKA - 560 042 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. ASHWIN SANCHETI. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. BADRI VISHAL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . TAHASILDAR

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN GROUND FLOOR

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.44273/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . T.V. VENKATESH

S/O LATE THALLAM VISHWANATH

SKPT ROAD, C-BLOCK

Y.N. HOSAKOTE TOWN AND HOBLI

PAVAGADA TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 141.

2 . N.S. MANJUNATHA

S/O LATE N.V. SHANKARATHNAM

SHETTY, R/AT C-BLOCK

Y.N. HOSAKOTE TOWN AND HOBLI

PAVAGADA TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 141.

3 . N.R. ASHWATHKUMAR

S/O N.V. RAJAGOPA SHETTY

RESIDING AT Y.N. HOSAKOTE

PAVAGADA TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 560 042.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. H SRINIVAS RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . SRI. KOTESHWARA TEMPLE SEVA

AND DEVELOPMENT TRUST (REGD)

Y.N. HOSAKOTE TOWN AND HOBLI

PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMKUR - 572 141

REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT

H.P. BALARAM NAYAK. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. R. NATARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.44687/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. TEJRAJ GULECHA

S/O SRI. PUKARAJ

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

R/ATNO.40/A, CLASSICAL

ORCHARDS, BEHIND MEENAKSHI

TEMPLE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 076.

2 . SRI. REDDY VEERANNA

S/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA

R/AT 9/1, CLASIC COURT

RICHMOND ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 025. ..PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.: GANAPATHY BHAT VAJRALLI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE STATE BY SPECIAL PUBLIC

PROSECUTOR, ATTACHED TO SPECIAL

COURT OF LAND GRABBING

PROHIBITION IN KARNATAKA

BENGALURU - 560 009.

3 . THE EXCUTIVE ENGINEER

B.B.M.P. BYTARAYANAPURA

YELAHANKA, BANGALORE - 64

AMNEDED V.C.O. DATED 05.02.2018.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISION OF SECTION-9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA

VIRUS THE ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19 AND ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 3-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.45114/2017:

BETWEEN:

SMT. R. VASANTHAMMA W/O K.P. REVANNA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS BYCHENAHLLI VILLAGE KUSHALANAGARA HOBLI SOMAWARPETE TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 234. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI - 571 234.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

SOMARPETE TALUK

MADIKERI - 571 234.

4 . THE CHIEF OFFICER

TOWN MUNICIPALITY

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

5 . MR. K.S. DEVAPPA

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

6 . SRI. M.E. MOHIDDIN

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

VICE PRESIDENT

KARNATAKA STATE SCIENCE PARISHAT

KODAGU DISTRICT UNIT

KODAGU - 571 234.

7 . DR. B.S. RADHAKIRSHNA

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS

RATHABEEDHI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

8 . SRI. K.C. GANAPATHI

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

KUSHALANAGARA-571 234

BYCHENAHALLI.

9 . SRI. POUL D'SOUZA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGAR - 571 234.

10 . SRI. M.S. BIDDAPPA

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

11 . SMT. M.B. INDIRA

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

12 . SRI. B.S. LOKESH SAGAR

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

13 . SRI. BOPAIAH

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

14 . DR. MOTAIAH

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234.

15 . SRI. SHIVAKUMARA

AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS

BYCHENAHALLI

KUSHALANAGARA - 571 234. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. B.S. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-6; R-5, R-7, R-10 & R-11, R-14 & R-15 ARE SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE/ORDER DATED 16.08.2017 INITIATED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEX-A IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.

IN W.P. NO.47887/2017:

BETWEEN:

SMT. SMITHA UDAY KUMAR W/O UDAY KUMAR SMITHA VILAS ALVAS HOSPITAL ROAD MARPADY VILLAGE MOODABIDRI - 574 227. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

MS BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . TAHASILDAR

MOODABIDRI

MANGALORE TALUK

D.K. DISTRICT - 574 227.

3 . SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

MOODABIDRI POLICE STATION

MANGALORE TALUK,

D.K. DISTRICT - 574 227. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA - VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.50674/2017:

BETWEEN:

SMT. B.V. SHYLAJA W/O N. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NO.88, VASANTHAPURA UTTARAHALLI HOBLI SUBRAMANAYAPURA POST BANGALORE - 560 061. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. V VISWANATH SETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR

VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY.

2 . SHRI. AJITH KUMAR R

S/O R.M. RAMACHANDRA

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

R/AT. NO.272, RAGHAVANAPALYA

J.P. NAGAR, 9TH PHASE

BENGALURU - 560 083.

3 . SHRI. N. SRINIVASA

S/O NARAYANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

R.AT NO.700, VASANTHAPURA

KALYANINAGAR UTTARAHALLI

HOBLI, SUBRAMANYAPURA

POST BANGALORE - 560 061.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. K. SURESH DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SRI. P. MAHADEVASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGALORE DATED 24.10.2017 BY TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND R-3 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING ACT, 2011 ON THE BASIS OF FALSE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE R-2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND THE R-2 UNDER SECTION 9(1) OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING ACT, VIDE ANNEX-K.

IN W.P. NO.51160/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . S.B. JAGADEESH

AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

S/O BYREGOWDA

RESIDING AT RAMESHWARA

BADAVANE, CHANNARAYAPATNA

TOWN, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK

HASSAN DISTRICT- 577 230.

2 . RATHNAMMA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

W/O VENKATARAMU

R/AT RAMARISHNA LAYOUT

GANDHI CIRCLE

CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK

HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 230.

3 . H.K. VISHVESHWARA

AGED ABOUR

S/O KUMARASWAMY

R/AT H. HOSAHALLI VILLAGE

SHRAVANABELAGOLA HOBLI

CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK

HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 230. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SAHUL HAMEED, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . SHRI. RAMAMURTHY GOWDA

S/O HANUMANTHRAYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

R/AT NO.98, 8TH MAIN ROAD

GYANAGANGANAGAR

ULLAL MAIN ROAD

BANGALORE - 560 056. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. C.R. GOPALSWAMY FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20 21 AND 300-1 AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.52972/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . BHANDARKAR'S ARTS AND

SCIENCE COLLEGE , TRUST

SPONSORED BY THE ACADEMY

OF GENERAL EDUCATION

MANIPAL, SITUATED AT

KUNDAPUR - 576 201

UDUPI DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SRI. N.P. NARAYANA SHETTY.

2 . THE ACADEMY OF GENERAL

EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY BUILDING

MADHAVANAGAR, MANIPAL - 576 104

REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFICER, DR. H. SHANTHARAM. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. N. RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

5TH FLOOR, M.S.BUILDING,

DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BENGALURU-01

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

KUNDAPUR TALUK

KUNDAPUR - 576 201

UDUPI DISTRICT.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

KUNDAPUR - 576 201

UDUPI DISTRICT.

4 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

UDUPI DISTRICT

MANIPAL - 576 104

UDUPI DISTRICT.

5 . THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

KUNDAPUR - 576 201

UDUPI DISTRICT

BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER.

6 . SR. GANESH SHETTY

FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN

TO PETITIONERS

GADDEMANE, LIC ROAD

VADERA HOBLI VILLAGE

KUNDAPUR TALUK.

7 . SRI. SHARATHCHANDRA HEGDE

S/O LATE B. SADANANDA HEGDE

RESIDING AT SADANANDA

SATWADY, POST MOODLAKATTE

KUNDAPURA TALUK

UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 217.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4;

SRI. H. JAYAKAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-6 & R-7; R-5 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AT ANNEX-C AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIOVE OF ARTICLES 14, 2021 AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.53008/2017:

BETWEEN:

SMT. SMITHA UDAY KUMAR W/O UDAY KUMAR SMITHA VILAS ALVAS HOSPITAL ROAD MARPADY VILLAGE MOODABIDRI - 574 227. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . TAHASILDAR

MOODABIDRI

MANGALORE TALUK

D.K. DISTRICT - 574 227. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.54035/2017:

BETWEEN

ARUN S S/O. LATE SHRI. V. G. SURENDRAN AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NO. 29, 2ND FLOOR J.V.R. PLAZA, BELLARY MAIN ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU - 24 MANAGING DIRECTOR MONITO BUILDERS PVT. LTD., A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.29 2ND FLOOR, GVR PLAZ, BELLARY MAIN ROAD HEBBAL, BANGALORE - 560 024. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . JOINT COMMISSIONER (NORTH)

TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT

BBMP, YALAHANKA ZONE

BANGALORE - 560 092.

3 . ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT

BBMP, YALAHANKA ZONE

BANGALORE - 560 092.

4 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

FOURTH FLOOR, DC OFFICE

BUILDING, REVENUE COMPLEX

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

5 . EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

MAJOR RAIN WATER DRAIN

(YELAHANKA), BBMP YELAHANKA

ZONE, BANGALORE-560 092. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 & R-4; SRI. ASHWIN S HALADY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2, 3 & 5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A).

IN W.P. NO.54081/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. V.G. SIDDHARTHA S/O SRI. S.V. GANGAIAH HEGDE AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS MANAGING PARTNER 'SHABAN RAMZAN' HALASUR ESTATE NR PURA TALUK

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT CHIKMAGALUR - 577 101. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M.S.BUIDLING

BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

BALEHONNUR ANGE

N.R. PURA TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR

CHIKMAGALUR - 577 101.

3 . ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

N R PURA TALUK

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR-577101

4 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

KOPPA KOPPA

CHIKMAGALUR-577101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS CONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A).

IN W.P. NO.54082/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. V.G. SIDDHARTHA HEGDE S/O SRI. S.V. GANGAIAH HEGDE AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS PROPRIETOR 'DEVADARSHINI ESTATE' KOPPA TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT CHIKMAGALUR-577101. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M.S.BUIDLING

BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

KOPALA TALUK

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR -577 104.

3 . ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

KOPALA TALUK

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR-577 101.

4 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

KOPPA, CHIKMAGALUR-577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 & R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS NO.LGC (S) NO.887/2017 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011(ANNEXURE-B)

IN W.P. NO.55683/2017:

BETWEEN:

1 . KARNATAKA REDDY JANANSANGA

BEING A REGISTED SOCIETY

UNDER MYSORE SOCIETIES ACT 1904

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT CA SITE NO.1

MAHAYOGI VEMANA RPAD

16TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK

KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034

REPTD. BY ITS SECRETARY

SRI. MUNINAGAPPA.

2 . SRI. MUNINAGAPPA

GENERAL SECRETARY

KARNATAKA REDDY JANA SANGHA,

NO.1, 100 FEET ROAD, MAHAYOGI

VEMANA ROAD, 16TH MAIN

KORAMANGALA 3RD BLOCK

BENGALURU-560 034. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.: MALLA REDDY B.V, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S.BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU-560 001

REPTD. BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . RICKY EAPEN

FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE

PETITIONER, MAJOR

R/AT NO.570/571, 3RD BLOCK

16TH A" MAIN, KORAMANGALA

BANGALORE-560 034.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1; SRI. K.B.S. MANIAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.03.2017 ANNX-A ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 IN CASE NO. LGC (P) 224/2017 AND THE PROCEEDING SIN LGC (P). 886/2017 VIDE ANNX-A.

IN W.P. NO.56296/2017:

BETWEEN:

DR. A.C. GANAPATHY S/O A.B.CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS RESIDING AT CHENNAGI VILLAGE CHENNAKOTE POST, POLLIBETTA KODAGU-571 215. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.M. POONACHA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . THE TASHILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571 218. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SUMMONS DATED 17.11.2017 IN PROCEEDING SNO. LGC (G) NO.1932/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF COURT HALL-01, THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 VIDE ANNX-A ISSUED BY REGISTRAR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT.

IN W.P. NO. 235/2018:

BETWEEN:

MR. C.V.MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, THE AUTHORIZED DIRECTOR, TELECOM EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.23, I FLOOR, NEHRUNAGAR MAIN ROAD, BEHIND REDDY PETROL BUNK, SHESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU-560020.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE)

AND;

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

ROOM NO.506, 5TH FLOOR,

M.S.BUILDING, GATE NO.3,

DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BENGALURU-560001.

(REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY)

BENGALURU NORTH (A) TALUK,

3RD FLOOR, HOTEL SHARAVATHI

BUILDING, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN

OPP. TO CANARA BANK,

BENGALURU-560064.

S/O. LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

RESIDING AT KOLIPURA VILLAGE,

JALA HOBLI, B.K.HALLI POST,

BENGALURU NORTH (A) TALUK,

BENGALURU-562149. 4. MR. Y.G.ASHWATH

S/O. LATE GOVINDAPPA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.358, “A” SECTOR,

KHB COLONY, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN,

BENGALURU-560064.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI. B.S. ANIL KUMAR, ADOVATE FOR R-3; R-4 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 01.06.2017 ANNEXURE- A AND FURTHER QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS

VIDE ANNEXURE-C ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE SPECIAL COURT-2, FOR PREVENTION OF LAND GRABBING, AT III FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN.

IN W.P. NO.463/2018:

BETWEEN:

M/S. JAMNALAL BAJAJ SEVA TRUST NO.226, 2ND FLOOR, BAJAJ BHAVAN NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI MANAGING TRUSTEE SRI. NEERAJ BAJAJ.

REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER, COL.BALAKUMAR NAIR, AGED ABUT 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE COL. N.G.K. NAIR, 13TH K.M.MAGADI ROAD, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU-560091. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI. N. SHANKARNARAYAN BHAT, ADVOCATE)

AND

REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO

GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR

VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

PRESIDENT,

SUVARNA KANNADA NADU YUVA VEDIKE (R),

PIPE LINE ROAD, SUNKADAKATTE,

BENGALURU-560 091. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1; SRI. M.S. PARTHASARATHI, ADVOATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBNING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 IS ULTRA VIRUS OF THE CONSTITUTION BY STRIKING DOWN THE SAID ACT AND BY DECLARING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID ACT CAN NOT BE MADE APPLICABLE OR ENFORCED AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE COURT OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU IN NO.LGC(P) NO.240/2016 DATED 24.11.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN THIS W.P.

IN W.P. NO.777/2018:

BETWEEN:

CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PVT. LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.46/A, 1ST MAIN, 3RD PHASE, J.P.NAGAR, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. R.G.ANIL.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANMOHAN P.N, ADVOCATE)

AND

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

MEMBER, LAKE MAINTENANCE

ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL-560100.

ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

BENGALURU-560100. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND QUASH THE REPORT DATED 12.12.2016 OF THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-L AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2016 AND 16.12.2016 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU IN LGC (S) 57/2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-N AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.1348/2018:

BETWEEN:

C. BHAVANI @ HAMSA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, W/O. SRI. K.M.NARENDRA KUMAR, D/O. LATE CHINNAPPA, NO.177, LAKSHMI NIVAS, 8TH MAIN, C.Q.A.L. LAYOUT, SAHAKARNAGAR, BENGALURU-560092.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VINOD REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M.S.BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR,

DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BENGALURU-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

S/O. LATE CHINNAPPA,

NO. F-14, FORTUNA ICON APARTMENT

‘F’ BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR,

BENGALURU-560 092.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1; SRI. H.S. DWARAKANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE CONCERN RECORDS, DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.1395/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. H.M.MUNINARAYANA S/O. LATE MUTHAPPA, DEAD BY HIS LR

SMT. MALINI N., W/O. LATE H.M.MUNINARAYANA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.9, SRI. RAMA NILAYA, BEHIND SRIRAMA TEMPLE, HULIMAVU, B.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560076.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVANNA K.G, ADVOCATE)

AND

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

BENGALURU-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

BENGALURU NORTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560002.

BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,

KANDAYA BHAVAN,

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560009.

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,

MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU-560064.

REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETARY, SRI. NAZEER AHAMED,

S/O. K.M.HYDER,

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

AT NO.391, 2ND MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, R.M.V.EXTENSION, BENGLAURU-560094. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 & R-4; SRI. R. KOTHWAL, ADVOCATE FOR R-5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 09.10.2014) IS ILLEGAL AND ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011.

IN W.P. NO.3032/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI BABU R. S/O. RAMACHANDRAPPA, AGED AOBUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.323 RAGHAVANAPLYA UTTRAPALYA HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK PIN-560078.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. SURESH DESAI, ADVOCATE)

AND

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S.BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR,

D.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU-560001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

LAW DEPARTMENT

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560009.

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,

BENGALURU

BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226, 14, 20 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.3641/2018:

BETWEEN:

M/S. SETHURAMAN ESTATE, MAGONDI VILLAGE & POST, NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALORE DISTRICT-577101. REPERSENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI NISHANT RAMESH GURJER, S/O. SRI. RAMESH L. GURJER, AGED 44 YEARS, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANMOHAN P.N, ADVOCATE)

AND

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT,

CHIKKAMAGALUR-577101

BALENHONNUR DIVISION,

NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK,

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/14) IS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA OR IN ALTERNATIVE ISSUE A DECLARATION THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.4729/2018:

BETWEEN:

W/O. LATE B PARAMASHIVAIAH

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

RESIDING AT

VETERNARY HOSPITAL ROAD,

TIPTUR TOWN, TIPTUR-572201.

S/O. LATE BASAVANNA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

RESIDING AT FARM HOUSE,

BEHIND TVS SHOW ROOM

B.H.ROAD, TIPTUR-572201. …PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

AND

S/O. BAPPANNA

AGE MAJOR

RESIDING AT PATEL COMPOUND

GORGONDANAHALLI,

TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572201.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (P) NO.1/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SEPCIAL COURT AS PER ANNEXURE-K, AS WITHOUT COMPETENCE AND JURISDICTION AND OTHERWISE BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.5389/2018:

BETWEEN:

P.G. RAMESH S/O. GANAPAIAH, 67 YEARS, HOSURU VILLAGE, AMMATTI HOBLI, VIRAJPET TALUK-571211, KODAGU DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)

AND

VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C.(G) NO.1942/2017 IN KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING, SPECIAL COURT, 3RD FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU, COURT HALL NO.1 DATED 31.10.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.5390/2018:

BETWEEN:

H.B.SRINIVASAMURTHY, S/O. LATE BHIMAIYA, 65 YEARS, HOSURU VILLAGE AND POST, AMMATTI HOBLI, VIRAJPET TALUK-571211 KODAGU DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)

AND

BENGALURU-560001.

VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C.(G) NO.1945/2017 IN KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING, SPECIAL COURT, 3RD FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU, COURT HALL NO.1 DATED 07.11.2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.5391/2018:

BETWEEN:

BALASUBRAMANYA S/O. GOPAL BHAT, 61 YEARS, HOSURU VILLAGE AND POST, AMMATTI HOBLI, VIRAJPET TALUK-571211 KODAGU DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)

AND

BENGALURU-560001.

VIRAJPET TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C.(G) NO.1946/2017 IN KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING, SPECIAL COURT, 3RD FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU, COURT HALL NO.1 DATED 07.11.2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.5704/2018:

BETWEEN:

NAGARAJU S/O. GANGADHARAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.416 TAVAREKERE VILLAGE, MADAGI ROAD, TAVAREKERE POST BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. SUDHARSHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND

S/O. LATE MANIRAJU

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

SOCIAL WORKER

C/O. YUDDA BHOOMI HORATA SENE

NO.32, ESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD,

RAMOHALLI, KENGERI HOBLI,

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

BENGALURU-560074.

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KHANDAYA BHAWAN

KEMPEGOWDA ROAD,

BENGALURU-560009.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-2; R-1 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROCEEDING ON THE RECORD OF THE SPECIAL COURT OF THE TRIAL OF OFFENCES UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING (PROHIBISION) ACT, 2011 IN PETITION NO.LGC 43 OF 2016 IS ANNEXURE-G AT PAGE NO.227- 270 DATED 08.01.2018 IN VIOLATION OF THE UNDERLYING STATUTE, IN GROSS VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION, OPPOSED TO EXTABLISHED LAWS AND IN CONTRAVENTION OF OTHER STATUTES AND HAS LED TO A GRAVE FAILURE AND MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE AND TO QUASH IT, ACCORDINGLY, IN EXERCISE OF THE CONSITUENT AND INHERENT POWER OF THIS HON’BLE COURT.

IN W.P.NO.6061/2018:

BETWEEN:

MR. CHANNAMUNIYAPPA S/O MUTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

PEDDAMAPALYA VILLAGE, TAWAREKERE HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH BENGALURU 562 130. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUSEL FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14,

ARTICLE 19 AND ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A)

IN W.P.NO.6330/2018:

BEETWEEN:

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF No.130, 3RD CROSS, 16TH MAIN ROAD, J.C.NAGAR, KURUBARAHALLI, BENGALURU -560 086. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. S GOPAL S/O LATE SRINIVASA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O NO.147, III MAIN, SHANTHIDHAMA CLUB ROAD, CHENGAPPA LAYOUT, SUNKADAKATTE, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. L. SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED JUDGE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURTS, COURT HALL No.2, AT BANGALORE IN CASE LGC (P) No.260 OF 2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P.NO.6376/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. SHIVALINGAIAH S/O SRI LINGE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/A PEDDANAPALYA VILLAGE TAVAREKERE POST, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BENGALURU. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. KESHAVA BHAT A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 & R-2; R-3 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER IN CASE No.LGC(P) No.43 OF 2016 FROM THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME.

IN W.P.NO.6583/2018:

BETWEEN:

PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 ARE RESIDENTS OF KANUTHOTA, AREHADA VILLAGE TALAGUPPA HOBI, SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 401. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY T.P, ADVOCATE)

AND:

PROBIBITION SPECIAL COURT, III FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE 560 009. REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR ….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, R-1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS; SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2018 PASSED IN LGC (G) No.1431 OF 2017 BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEXURE-E, AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

IN W.P.NO.6960/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE SRI RANGAIAH RESIDING AT HANUMANTAPURA MIDIGESHI HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 132.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. T. SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 TO R-4 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH FOR R-5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2017 ONE PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT IN CASE No. LGC(S) No.186 OF 2017 & 187 OF 2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-K TO THE WRIT PETITION; HOLD AND DECLARE THAT SECTION 9 OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IS ULTRA VIRUS AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND PASS APPROPRIATE TO STRUCK DOWN THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P.NO.7868/2018:

BETWEEN:

N KAMALASAMBASIVA @ SAMBASIVAMURTHY SWAMIJI, S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, DHARMADHIKARI SRI. KOTILINGASWAMY TEMPLE, R/AT KAMMASANDRA VILLAGE, BETHAMANGALA HOBLI, BANGARPET TALUK-563 121.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAHUL S REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND ETC.

IN W.P.NO.8035/2018:

BETWEEN:

DAADYS DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS REPRESENTED BY BOBY SEBASTIAN S/O LATE K. T. SABASTIAN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/A NO.383, 9TH MAIN 7TH SECTOR, H S R LAYOUT BENGALURU – 560 102.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. N. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS

ULTRA VIRES THE CONSITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-1 IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P.NO.8186/2018:

BETWEEN:

MVC HANUMANTHAIAH SON OF VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED 70 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 2, WEST PARK ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU – 560 003.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHAKAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001.

…..RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2017 IN LGC(S) No.500 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU, (CH-1) AS PER ANNEXURE-G, ACCORDING TO LAW.

IN W.P. NO.8187/2018:

BETWEEN:

R. NAGARATHNA W/O SRI. MVC HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2 WEST PARK ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 003. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. SHAKAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2017 IN LGC (S) NO. 501/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGLORE, (CH-1) AS PER ANNWXURE-G, ACCORDING TO LAW.

IN W.P. NO.8189/2018:

BETWEEN:

C. SHASHIDAR S/O M.V.C. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT 2, WEST PARK

ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. SHAKAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.11.2017 IN LGC (S) NO. 502/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGLORE, (CH-1) AS PER ANNWXURE-G, ACCORDING TO LAW.

IN W.P. NO.8190/2018:

BETWEEN:

V.R. SWAMY S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 2 WEST PARK ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. SHAKAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2017 IN LGC (S) NO. 504/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGLORE, (CH-1) AS PER ANNWXURE-G, ACCORDING TO LAW.

IN W.P. NO.8191/2018:

BETWEEN:

C. MANJULA D/O MVC HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 2 WEST PARK ROA, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. SHAKAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2017 IN LGC (S) NO. 505/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGLORE, (CH-1) AS PER ANNWXURE-G, ACCORDING TO LAW.

IN W.P. NO.8210/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. A.M. NARAYANASWAMY S/O MUNICHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING AT ARASANAHALLI VILLAGE, SULIBELE POST HOSAKOTE TALUK - 562114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BHADRINATH R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARANTAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M S BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER

BMTC BUILDING II FLOOR

BENGALURU DIVISION

BENGALURU - 560004.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

V V TOWER, BENGALURU - 560 001.

4 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

DODDABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION

DODDABALLAPURA - 561203

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

5 . THE THASILDAR

HOSKOTE TALUK HOSKOTE - 562114

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

6 . SRI B N GOPALA GOWDA

S/O LATE NARAYANA GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS

RESIDING AT BENNIGANAHALLI

VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI

HOSKOTE TALUK - 562114

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

7 . SRI B C CHIKKA BACHE GOWDA

S/O LATE CHANNA BYRE GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS

RESIDING AT BENNIGANAHALLI

VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI,

HOSKOTE TALUK - 562114

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

8 . SRI B N VENKATARAMANA GOWDA

S/O LATE NARAYANA GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS

RESIDING AT BENNIGANAHALLI

VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI,

HOSKOTE TALUK - 562114

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

9 . SRI B N BACHE GOWDA

S/O LATE NARAYANA GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

RESIDING AT BENNIGANAHALLI

VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI,

HOSKOTE TALUK - 562114

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

10 . SRI B C VENKATESH GOWDA

S/O LATE CHANNA BYREGOWDA

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

RESIDING AT BENNIGANAHALLI

VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI,

HOSKOTE TALUK - 562114

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-5; SRI. P.M. SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADVOCATE R-6,7, 9 & 10)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.01.2018 IN CASE LGC (S) NO.1252 OF 2017 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGALORE AS FOUND AT ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.8585/2018:

BETWEEN:

THARIQ KHAN S/O MAJEED KHAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT BILGUNDA VILLAGE AMMATHI HOBLI, VIRAJAPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SACHIN B.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . TAHASILDAR

VIRAJAPET TALUK, VIRAJAPET

KODAGU DISTRICT-571 218. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.01.2018 AND ENTIRE PROCEEDING SIN PROCEEDINGS ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA SPECIAL COURT FOR LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION BANGALORE VIDE ANEX-A

IN W.P. NO.9116/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT. A.S. NIRMALA W/O LATE VIVEK AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.49/3, 16TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P.S. RAJAGOPAL, SR. COUNSEL FOR

SRI. BHADRINATH R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M S BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU EAST ALUK

KRISHNARAJAPURAM

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 036.

3 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

KRISHNARAJAPURAM

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 036.

4 . SRI. MUNIVENKATAPPA

S/O LATE CHIKKANNA

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.156, 1ST CROSS

KURUDUSONNENAHALLI ROAD

BEHIND PETROL BUNK

MEDAHALLI VIRGONAGAR POST

BENGALURU - 560 049.

5 . SRI. M. KRISHNA MURTHY

S/O LATE M.S. MUNIKEMPAIAH

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

RESIDING AT MEDAHALLI

EXTENSION (BEHIND RAMARA

TEMPLE), VIRGONAGAR POST

BIDARAHALLI HOBLI

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 049. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP R-1 TO R-3; SRI. RAJESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; SRI. RAGHUNATH V, ADVOCATE FOR R-5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300A.

IN W.P. NO.9117/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. M. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O LATE M.S. MUNIKEMPAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT MEDAHALLI EXTENSION (BEHIND RAMARA TEMPLE) VIRGONAGAR POST BIDARAHALLI POST BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU - 560 049. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P.S. RAJAGOPAL, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. BHADRINATH R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

KRISHNARAJAPURAM

BENGALURU - 560 036.

3 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

BENGALURU EAST TALUK

KRISHNARAJAPURAM

BENGALURU - 560 036.

4 . SRI. MUNIVENKATAPPA

S/O LATE CHIKKANNA

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

R/AT NO.156, IST CROSS

KURUDUSONNEHALLI ROAD

BEHIND PETROL BUNK

MEDAHALLI, VIRGONAGAR POST

BENGALURU - 560 049.

5 . SMT A.S. NIRMALA

W/O LATE VIVEK

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.49/3, 16TH

CROSS, 4TH MAIN ROAD

MALLESHWARAM

BENGALURU - 560 003. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. RAJESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; SRI. SRINATH P, ADVOCATE FOR R-5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300A.

IN W.P. NO.9194/2018:

BETWEEN:

VITTAL SHETTY S/O KORAGA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT ULLODI JAMBUVALLI GRAMA BEGUVALLI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 220. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAGHUPATHY T.N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

VIDHANA SOUDHA

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . DEPARTMENT OF FORESTS

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

M S BUILDING 4TH FLOOR

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . RANGE FOREST OFFICER

MANDAGADDE RANGE

MANDAGADDE POST,

THIRTHAHALLI TALUK

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 220. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300A.

IN W.P. NO.11029/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. H.L. KRISHNAPPA S/O LAKSHMANAIAH R/AT HONNAGHANAHATTI VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE POST MAGADI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU - 560 030. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE

DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

BENGALURU CITY.

2 . THE THASILDAR

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

KHANDAYA BHAWAN

KEMPEGOWDA ROAD

BANGALORE - 560 009.

3 . SRI. HEMANTHARAJU

S/O LATE MUNIRAJU

SOCIAL WORKER

C/O YUDDA BHOOMI HORATA

SENE, NO.32, ESHWARA TEMPLE

ROAD, RAMOHALLI, KENGERI

HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH

TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 074. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2; R-3 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 08.01.2018 TAKING COGNIZANCE IN L.G.C.NO.(P) NO.43/2016 AGAINST THE PETITIONER ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT SET UP FOR PROHIBITION OF LAND GRABBING, BENGALURU ON 08.01.2018.

IN W.P. NO.11306/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. LAKSHMICHAND AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS S/O MOHANLAL COFFEE PLANTER VIJAYALAKSHMI JEWELLERS M.G. ROAD, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY

TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE

DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE TAHASILDAR

CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK

AND DISTRICT

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 IS ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION BY STRIKING DOWN THE SAID ACT AND QUASH THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BANGALORE IN LGC (S) NO.1712/2017 AT ANNEX-A IN THIS W.P.

IN W.P. NO.11767/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . VISTARA VENTURES

REPRESENTED BY ITS PARNTER

S.K. PRAJWAL

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

OFFICE AT NO.191, 2ND FLOOR

16TH MAIN, 36TH CROSS

4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR

BENGALURU - 560 054.

2 . SMT. V. PADMAVATHY

D/O LATE A. VENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.255/6

7TH MAIN ROAD, N.S. PALYA

BTM 2ND STAGE

BENGALURU - 560 076. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HEMANTH KUMAR D, ADVOCATE)

100

AND:

AROON SAAB S/O YAKOOB SAAB AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT NO.10 VARASIDHI VINAYAKA LAYOUT APR CHOULTRY ROAD VANGASANDRA, 14TH CROSS MADIWALA POST BENGALURU - 560 068. …RESPONDENT

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (P) NO.316/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURTS AT BANGALORE VIDE ANNEX-H DATED 07.03.2018 AND ANNEX-J DATED 07.03.2018.

IN W.P. NO.11973/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. KRISHNADEVERAYA EDUCATION TRUST A TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN TRUSTS ACT HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.16, BALLARI ROAD SADASHIVANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 080 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR. K. SYAMA RAJU. ...PETITIONER (BY MS. NAYANATARA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G.L. VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

101

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES ARTICLES 14, 20 (1), 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.11975/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. KRISHNADEVERAYA EDUCATION TRUST, A TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN TRUSTS ACT HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.16, BALLARI ROAD SADASHIVANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 080 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR. K. SYAMA RAJU. ...PETITIONER

(BY MS. NAYANATARA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G.L. VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR BANGALORE - 560 001 …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

102

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES ARTICLES 14, 20 (1), 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.12264/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. D.R. SIDDARAMAIAH S/O LATE RANGAPPA R/O DODDANARAVANGALA VILLAGE BELLAVI HOBLI - 572 153 TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. V.B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY PRL.SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 01.

2 . SRI. D. GANGANNA

S/O LATE CHIKKURAIAH

R/O NO.20, 11TH CROSS

MANJUNATHANAGAR

MAGADI ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 023. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. A.V. GANGADHARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

103

PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.01.2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, DATED 24.01.2018, IN CASE LGC (P) NO.1369/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-P, WITH RESPECT TO THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.21 OF DODDANARAVANGALA VILLAE, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, MEASURING 8 ACRES 20 GUNTAS AND THEREBY DROP THE PROCEEDING SIN CASE LGC (P) NO.1369/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU.

IN W.P. NO.12614/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. S.G. GOVINDAIAH

S/O LATE GIRIGOWDA

AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.

2 . SMT. PRIYANKA G

D/O. S.G. GOVINDAIAH

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.

3 . SMT. NEETHU G

D/O S.G. GOVINDAIAH

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.

THE PETITIONERS ARE

RESIDING AT #75

II "H" MAIN ROAD

11TH BLOCK

NAGARABHAVI II STAGE

BENGALURU - 560 072.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA D.C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

104

BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . SRI. HEMANTHARAJU

S/O LATE MUNIRAJU

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

NO.32, EASHWARA TEMPLE

ROAD, RAMOHALLI

KENGERI HOBLI

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

BENGALURU - 560 074. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & R- 2; R-3 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR PROHIBITION OF LAND GRABBING, BENGALURU, IN LGC (P) NO.43/2016 DATED 08.01.2018, VIDE ANNEXURE-M IN TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4 AND 5 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, AS ILLEGAL, VOID AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

IN W.P. NO.13112/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . R. RAMANAND

105

S/O RAJANAHALLI LAXMANASETTY

AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS

PRESIDENT

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

2 . MUDDEGOWDRU REVANA SIDDAPPA

S/O MUDDEGOWDRU CHENNABASAPPA

AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS

VICE PRESIDENT

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

3 . DR. SHAMANUR SHIVASHANKARAPPA

S/O LATE S KALLAPPA

AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS

SECRETARY

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION PJ

EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

4 . S.S. MALLIKARJUN

S/O S.S. SHIVASHANKARAPPA

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

JOINT SECRETARY

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

5 . A.C. JAYANNA

S/O A. CHANNABASAPPA

AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS

TREASURER

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

6 . A.S. VEERANNA

S/O A. CHANNABASAPPA

AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

MEMBER

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

7 . MAKANUR MALLIKARJUNAPPA

106

S/O MAKANUR MALLESHAPPA

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

MEMBER

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

8 . S.S. JAYANNA

S/O SHAMANUR SHIVAPPA

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

MEMBER

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

PJ EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

9 . SMT. K.A. GIRIJAMMA

W/O LATE KIRUVADI ANJANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS

MEMBER

M/S BAPUJI EDUCATION ASSOCIATION PJ

EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 002.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SIDDHARTH B MUCHANDI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

KANDHAYA BHAVAN

K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

107

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT IN LGC(S) 246/2016 (SUO-MOTU) VIDE ANNEX-A.

IN W.P. NO.14215/2018:

BETWEEN

1 . SRI. JAGADISH

S/O NARAYANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

WORKING AS RTC SHRESTEDHAR

OFFICE OF TALUK, TIPTUR TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT, R/O VIDYANAGAR

10TH CROSS,STELLA MARYS

SCHOOL ROAD, TIPTUR

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 107.

2 . SRI. D.K. RANGAPPA

S/O KARIYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

WORKING AS REVENUE

INSPECTOR(I/C)

NONAVINEKERE HOBLI

TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT

R/O KANTCHEGATTA ROAD

TIPTUR, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 107.

3 . SRI. NAVEEN

S/O SHIVAIAH

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

WORKING AS VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT

EDEENAHALLI TALUK, KASABA HOBLI

TIPTUR TALUK,TUMKUR DISTRICT

R/O MRUTHYUNJAYANAGAR EXTENSION

KANTCHEGATTA ROAD, TIPTUR

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 107. ...PETITIONERS

108

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . SRI. RAVI KUMAR

S/O BAPPANNA

AGE MAJOR

RESIDING AT PATEL COMPOUND

GORGONDANAHALLI

TIPTUR TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 107. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(P) NO.1/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AS PER ANNEX-H AS WITHOUT COMPETENCE AND JURISDICTION AND OTHERWISE BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID.

IN W.P. NO.14390/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. H. VISHWANATH S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA NO.2511, 26TH CROSS BANASHANKARI II STAGE BANGALORE - 70. ...PETITIONER

109

(BY SRI. JEEVAN K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE TAHASILDHAR

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYABHAVANA

BANGALORE - 09.

2 . THE SURVEYOR

DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVANA

BANGALORE - 09.

3 . V. CHANDRA SHEKAR

S/O LATE V. GUNDANNA

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

NO.103, 1ST BLOCK

JANAPRIYA LAKE VIEW

APARTMENT, KODICHIKKANAHALLI

BANGALORE - 560 076.

4 . H. RAMACHANDRAIAH

S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

NO.730, 6TH CROSS, KEMPEGOWDA

HBCS, LAYOUT, 3RD BLOCK

3RD PHASE, 3RD STAGE

BANASHANKARI, BANGALORE - 70.

5 . K. RAVINDRA REDDY

S/O PURUSHOTTAM REDDY

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

NO.8-2-120/8-2-120/86/1-3

ROAD NO.2, BANJARA HILLS

HYDERABAD - 500.034.

6 . CHIKKA VENKATAPPA

S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

110

(FORMER COMMISSIONER OF CMC

BOMMANAHALLI), NO.159E

17TH MAIN ROAD, VIJAY NAGAR

BANGALORE - 40. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP, FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI. RAVISHANKAR S, ADVOCATE R-4; R-3 IS PARTY-IN-PERSON; R-5 SERVED & )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 & 300- A AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.15257/2018:

BETWEEN:

K. RAVINDRA REDDY S/O K. PURUSHOTHAM REDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO 8-2-293/82/F/A/35-B ROAD NO 6, B/S FNCC JUBILEE HILLS HYDERABAD - 500 033. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. G.R. MOHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDINGS, 5TH FLOOR

BENGALURU - 560 001

BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR V

111

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

S/O LATE V. GUNDANNA

NO 103, 1ST BLOCK

1ST STAGE, JANAPRIYA LAKE

APARTMENTS, KODICHIKKANAHALLI

BENGALURU - 560 076. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 R-2 IS PARTY-IN-PERSON)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND THAT THE ACT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR PROCEDURE ENSURING JUST AND FAIR TRIAL OF AN ACCUSED PARTICULARLY IN THE MATTER O DISPUTE REGARDING TITLE AND; FURTHER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT DENYING LIBERTY TO THE PETITIONER DOES QUALIFY THE TEST OF REASONABLENESS

IN W.P. NO.15270/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. SANJAY JAYARAM

S/O N.G. JAYARAM

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.

2 . SMT. APARNA DESRAJ

(APARNA DEVRAJ URS)

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

W/O SANJAY JAYARAM.

3 . SRI. UDAY JAYARAM

S/O N.G. JAYARAM

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

112

ALL RESIDING AT NO.24

17TH MAIN ROAD, MALLESHWARA

WEST, BANGALORE - 560 003. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANJAY KRISHNA V, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR

DR B R AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU-560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

MAGADI TALUK

TALUK OFFICE, MAGADI

RAMNAGARA DISTRICT.

3 . SRIHEMANTH RAJU

S/O LATE MUNI RAJU

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

C/O YUDDA BHOOMI

HORATASENE, RAMOHALLI

KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE

SOUTH TALUK

BANGALORE - 560 074. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2; R-3 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.01.2018 UNDER ANNX-A PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IN CASE L.G.C.(P) NO.43/2016.

113

IN W.P. NO.18327/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. M.B. DEVAYYA S/O BHEEMAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS KANDANGALA VILLAGE VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

VIRAJPET, KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKEI - 571 218.

3 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR FOREST

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKEI - 571 218.

4 . TAHASILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKEI - 571 218. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

114

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19 AND ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.18329/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT. N.P. BINDU W/O. POOVAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS KANDANGALA VILLAGE VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560001.

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

VIRAJPET, KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKEI - 571 218.

3 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR FOREST

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKEI - 571 218.

4 . TAHASILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKEI - 571 218.

115

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19 AND ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.18646/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS S/O LATE PATEL MUNISHAMAPPA R/A MALIGENAHLLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, DEVENAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ABHINAV RAMANAND A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUDE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR

ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

DEVANAHALLI TALUK

BENGALURU RURAL

DISTRICT - 562 110.

3 . THE REGISTRAR

116

KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

PROHIBITION SPECIAL COUORT

M.S. BUILDING

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRAVIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.19751/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . G.T. SRINIVAS

S/O LATE POOLA THIMMARAYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

2 . VENKATALAKSHMAMMA

W/O G.T. SRINIVAS

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

3 . G.S. VINOD RAJ

S/O G.T. SRINIVAS

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.

ALL ARE RESIDINGS AT

B BLOCK, BAPUJINAGAR

GUDIBANDE TOWN

GUDIBANDE TALUK - 561 209

CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS

117

(BY SRI. AKKI MANJUNATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . MOHAMMED ELIYAS

S/O LATE SHAIK FAKRUDDIN

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

RESIDING AT UPPARAHALLI

VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI

GUDIBANDE TALUK - 561 209

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.19761/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . K. MANOHAR RAJU

S/O LATE RAGHAVARAJU

AGED AOBUT 60 YEARS

2 . S. AMRUTHA KUMARI

W/O K. MANOHAR RAJU

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

118

BOTH RESIDING AT NO.2-18/8

NEAR AYYAPASWAMY TEMPLE

4TH CROSS, R.R. LAYOUT

HOSAPALYA ROAD

MANGAMMANAPALYA

BENGALURU - 560 068. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. ASHOK HARANALLI, SR. COUSEL FOR SRI. ABHINAY Y.T, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BOMMANAHALLI ZONE BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. R. RAMESHCHANDRAN, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN L.G.C. (S)64/2016 VIDE ANNX-J. AND CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONTINUE THE INTERIM ORDER GRANTED BY IT ON 22.12.2017 TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE L.G.C. (S) 64/2016 VIDE ANNX-G.

IN W.P. NO.22025/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. SRIKANTH

S/O SRI. NAGALINGAPPA KAYAKAD

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

2 . SRI. DEVARAJ

119

S/O SRI. SHIVAPPA MALLAPUR

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

3 . SRI. SIDDESH

S/O SRI. THIPPESHAPPA BANAKAR

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

4 . SRI. BUDEPPA

S/O SRI. VEERAPPA BADIGER

ALIAS ARKACHARI

AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

5 . SRI GADIGEPPA

S/O SRI.VEERAPPA KUMBLUR,

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

6 . SRI. NAGARAJ

S/O SRI. VIRUPAKSHAPPA

BEVINAHALLI

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

R/O.PURADAKERE,

HEREKERUR TALUK,

HAVERI.

7 . SRI. YOGESH

S/O SRI. BASAPPA KAYAKAD

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

120

8 . SRI. NAGAPPA

S/O SRI. BASAPPA KAYAKAD

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

9 . SRI. SHIVARAJ

S/O SRI NAGARAJ BAVENAHALLI,

R/O.PURADAKERE,

HEREKERUR TALUK,

HAVERI.

10 . SRI. VIRUPAKSHAPPA

S/O SRI. SIDDALINGAPPA

BEVINAHALLI

AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

11 . SRI. SHAREIFF SAB

S/O SRI. KAJI SAB BADIGER

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

12 . SRI. TIPPU SULTAN

S/O SRI. KAJA SAB JATIGAR

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI.

13 . SRI. MOHAMAD SAB

S/O KHAZI SAB JATIGAR

ALIAS BADIGERE

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

R/O PURADAKERE

HEREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI. ...PETITIONERS

121

(BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . SRI. SRINGERI MUTT VIDABHINAVA

NARASIMHA BHARATI SWAMI GURU

SACHIDANANDA SHANKAR BHARATI

SWAMIGALU, KUDLI

SHIVAMOGGA TALUK

SHIVAMOGGA - 577 227.

3 . THE TAHASILDHAR

HIREKERUR TALUK

HAVERI - 581 111. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-3 R-2 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 2, 7, 11, 20 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING AND PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011 AS VOID, ARBITRARY, UNJUST AS THEY ARE VIOLATIVE OF PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.22817/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA R/AT H. THIMMAPURA VILLAGE

122

BELENHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 228. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PUNDIKAI ISHWARA BHAT, ADVCOATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR

OF FOREST, FOREST DEPARTMENT

BHADRAVATHI DIVISION

BHADRAVATHI, SHIVAMOGGA

DISTRICT - 577 301.

3 . THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR

OF FOREST, FOREST DEPARTMENT

TARIKERE SUB DIVISION

TARIKERE CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 228.

4 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

FOREST DEPARTMENT

LAKKAVALLI RANGE

TARIKERE TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALURU

DISTRICT - 577 228. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 15.12.2017 PASSED BY KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION

123

SPECIAL COURTS, BENGALURU IN L.G.C.(T)NO.1984/2017 (ANNEXURE-A)

IN W.P. NO.22837/2018:

BETWEEN:

M/S VINAYAKA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 10/1 LAKSHMINARAYAN COMPLEX, PALACE ROAD VASANTHANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI. K.M. LINGARAJA.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. CHANDAN K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 ('THE ACT') AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (S) NO.1611 OF 2017 IN KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, KANDAYA BHAVANA ('THE SPECIAL COURT')

124

VIDE ANNEXURE-D IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.

IN W.P. NO.23435/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. B.S. PATIL

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

S/O SANGANAGOUDA PATIL.

2 . SMT. SHANTA PATIL

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

W/O B.S. PATIL.

NO 112, SECTOR II 2ND CROSS

7TH MAIN, NOBO NAGAR

BANNERGHATTA ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 076. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

BENGALURU CITY.

2 . ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

SWD, BBMP, BOMMANAHALLI

BENGALURU - 560 068. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. N.R. JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

125

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 29.01.2018 TAKING COGNIZANCE IN L.G.C.NO. (G) NO.131 OF 2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER'S ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU.

IN W.P. NO.23437/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT. UMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS W/O SUBRAMANYAM NO.122B, 2ND CROSS 7TH MAIN, NOBO NAGARA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 076. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

BENGALURU CITY.

2 . ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

SWD, BBMO, BOMMANAHALLI

BENGALURU - 560 068. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED)

126

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 29.01.2018 TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU.

IN W.P. NO.23819/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAMARAYA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS S/O LATE K.N. NAYAK NO.113, BHAGYASHREE NILAYA 2ND CROSS, 7TH MAIN, SECTOR II NOBO NAGARA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 076. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

BENGALURU CITY.

2 . ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINNER

SWD, BBMO BOMMANAHALLI

BENGALURU - 560 068, …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

127

PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 29.01.2018 TAKING COGNIZANCE IN L.G.C.NO.(G) NO.133 OF 2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU.

IN W.P. NO.25761/2018:

BETWEEN:

G. LAKSHMANAPPA S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/A KADIVANAKATTE VILLAGE HEBBALLI PSOT HOSADURGA TLAUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 554. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

HOSADURGA SUB DIVISION

CHITRADURGA - 577 527.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

HOSADURGA TALUK

CHITRADURGA - 577 527. …RESPONDENTS

128

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNAATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.25768/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. MUTHAPPA B.K S/O LATE KORAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS RESIDING AT PODAVADA VILLAGE KARADA, NAPOKLU HOBLI MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 574 214. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RANJAN KUMAR K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

NAPOKLU HOBLI

MADIKERI TALUK - 574 214.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

MADIKERI TALUK

COORG DISTRICT - 571 201.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

MADIKERI TALUK

MADIKERI DISTRICT - 571 201.

4 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

129

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05.01.2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT IN LGC (T) NO.1694/2017 (ANNEXURE-J).

IN W.P. NO.26054/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. NAMBUDAMADA PRAKASH S/O MACHAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT V. BADAGA VILLAGE VEERAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 218. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

TO GOVERNMENT

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

130

M.S. BUILDING

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE THASILDAR

VEERAJPET TALUK

KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 218. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE SECTION 4 AND 5 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS UN CONSTITUTIONAL AND STRIKE DOWN THE SAME VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.26481/2018:

BETWEEN:

W/O B/G. ANANDA PRAKASH

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

BADAVANADINNE, KOLUR VILLAGE

KENJIGE POST, BANAKAL HOBALI

MUDIGERE TALUK - 577 132.

S/O B.P. GAPALAGOWDA

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS

AGROCITIROST, BADAVANADINNE

KOLUR VILLAGE, KENJIGE POST

BANAKAL HOBALI

MUDIGERE TALUK - 577 132

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SUYOG, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ARUNA SHYAM M, ADVOCATE)

131

AND:

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

S/O BHADRAYYA

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

AGRICULTURIST, BADAVANADINNE

KOLUR VILLAGE, KENJIGE POST

BANAKAL HOBALI

MUDIGERE TALUK - 577 132

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHILING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. SANDESH A.S, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND SAID ACT IS NO APPLICABLE TO THE PETITIONER.

IN W.P. NO.26545/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . GAVI RANGAIAH @ GAVI RANGAPPA

S/O RAMAIAH

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

2 . MALLAPPA

S/O HANUMANTHAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

132

3 . MURTHY NAIKA

S/O SOMLA NAIKA

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

4 . T.H. SIDDAIAH

S/O HANUMANTHAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS AND

R/A KATHEHOLE VILLAGE

UDUVALLI POST, HIRIYUR TALUK

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, REVENUE

DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

HIRIYUR TALUK

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHILING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO 3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

133

PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.26546/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . LAKKAMMA

W/O KARIYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

2 . HONNANAYAKA

S/O RANGANAYAKA

AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.

BOTH THE PETITIONERS ARE

AGRICULTURISTS AND

R/A KATHEHOLE VILLAGE

UDUVALLI POST, HIRIYUR TALUK

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

HIRIYUR TALUK

CHITRADURGA

134

DISTRICT - 577 598. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHILING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21, AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.27912/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . RAMESH PADATHARE

S/O BAPURAO

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

2 . ANNAPOORNA BAI

W/O LAKSHMANARAO PADTHARE

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.

PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 ARE

RESIDENTS OF GANDHINAGAR

VILLAGE, SUNNADAHALLI POST

BHADRAVATHI TALUK - 577 302

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. S V PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

135

2 . MANJUANTH G

S/O GOVINDAPPA

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

RESIDENT OF GANDHINAGAR

VILALGE, BHADRAVATHI

TALUK - 577 302

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHILING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. D. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND DECLARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO LAND GRABBING ON THE PART OF THE PETITIONERS IN RESPECT OF 2 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND IN SY. NO. 13/44/P70 O YAREHALLI VILLAGE AND A HOUSE SITE BEARING NO.152400103100501020 OF YAREHALLI VILLAGE.

IN W.P. NO.28214/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. H.K. BASAVEGOWDA S/O KALASEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT HONNALLI MAGUNDI VILLAGE NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 134. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

136

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE

DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

BALEHONNUR RANGE

NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 134. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHILING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATKAK LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS UN CONSTITUTIONAL AND STRICKE DOWN THE SAME VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.28215/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT. JANAKI W/O LATE KANTHU MUKHARI AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RESIIDNG AT KUCHCHIGUDDE DARKHASTH HOUSE, DOOR NO 1-18 SHIMANTHOORU VILLAGE, MULKI HOBLI, MANGALORE - 574 154. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S. ADVOCATE)

137

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE

DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE SPECIAL THASILDAR

MULKI , MANGALORE TALUK

D.K. DISTRICT - 574 154. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHILING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS UN CONSTITUTIONAL AND STRIKE DOWN THE SAME VIDE ANNEX-A.

IN W.P. NO.28637/2018:

BETWEEN:

SANGAMESHWARA COFFEE ESTATES LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES

138

AT NO.1/8, ARTILLERY ROAD ULSOOR, BENGALURU - 560 008 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.S. APPADURAI AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O MR. SRI. RAM. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. APPAIAH P.B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR - 577 101.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

CHIKMAGALUR TALUK

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR - 577 101.

4 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

JAGRA HOBLI, CHIKMAGALUR

TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT NO.38 OF 2014) IN UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AS IT VILATES THE PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO A FREE AND FAIR TRIAL

139

GUARANTEED UNDER ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.29281/2018:

BETWEEN:

ASHOK MADIVALA S/O MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS VENOOR HOBLI & VILLAGE BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K. DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHRIHARI K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001

REPRESETED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHASILDAR

BELTHANGADY TALUK

D.K. DISTRICT - 574 214.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

D.K. DISTRICT - 574 214. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO 3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

140

IN W.P. NO.32121/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. SATHISH S/O LATE M. GURUSHANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDENT OF BEGUVALLI TUDUR POST, TIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SAMMITH S, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVANANDA, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESETNED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

VIKASA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

MANDAGADDE DIVISION/RANGE

MANDAGADDE AT & POST - 577 220

THIRTHAHALLI TALUK

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRBHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO. LGC (G) 2284/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR PREVENTION OF LAND GRABBING, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN.

141

IN W.P. NO.33339/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . BORALINGAIAH

S/O RAMAIAH

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

2 . CHIKKANNA

S/O RANGAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

3 . NINGAPPA

S/O HANUMANTHAPPA

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. 4 . PATHAPPA

S/O UGRAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

5 . KENCHAMMA

W/O LACHHAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

6 . MOHAN

S/O MANNANGATTAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

7 . MARIMUTTU

S/O MANNANGATTAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

8 . GANGAJJI

W/O LAXMIAH,

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.

9 . ANGAYAMMA

D/O MARIYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.

ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE

AGRICULTURIST

R/A KATHEHOLE VILLAGE

UDUVALLI POST, HIRIYUR

TALUK, CHITRADURGA

142

DISTRICT - 577 598. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPATMENT

M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

CHITRADUGA SUB-DIVISION,

CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

HIRYUR TALUK, HIRIYUR

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND / OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.33741/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . NAGARAJ

143

S/O LATE BASAPPA

RESIDING AT DASALU KUNTE

VILLAGE, C.N. DURGA HOBLI

KORATIKERE TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 129.

2 . MANJUNATHA

S/O NAGARAJ

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

DASALU KUNTE VILLAGE

C.N. DURGA HOBLI

KORATIKERE TALUK

TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 129. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SRIKANTH N.V, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 01.

2 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

FOREST DEPARTMENT

BHADRAVATHI DIVISION

BHADRAVATHI, SHIMOGGA

DISTRICT - 577 301.

3 . ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR

OF FOREST, FOREST DEPARTMENT

TARIKERE SUB DIVISION

TARIKERE, CHIKMAGALORE

DISTRICT - 577 528.

144

4 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

FOREST DEPARTMENT

LAKKAVALLI RANGE

TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALORE

DISTRICT - 577 528. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICES DATED 22.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 INTIMATING THE PETITIONERS THAT THE SUIT IN O.S. NO.132/2016 PENDING ON THE IFLE OF CIVIL JUDGE, TARIKERE FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AGAINST THE R-2 TO 4 STANDS TRANSFERRED TO THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER SECTION 20 KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AND NUMBERED AS L.G.C. (T)NO.1992/2017 AND THE PETITIONERS ARE REQUIRED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE SPECIAL COURT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND B.

IN W.P. NO.34292/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. MAHABOOB SAB

S/O BELLARI VALISAB

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

2 . SRI. ZAKRIYA

S/O ALLAHA BAKSHI,

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.

3 . SRI. NOORULLA

S/O ALLAHA BAKSHI,

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.

145

4 . SRI. MAHABOOB SAB

S/O ALLAHA BAKSHI,

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

5 . MUJEEBUR REHAMAN

S/O JABBAR SAB

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.

6 . NOOR AHMED

S/O RASOOL SAB

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

7 . SRI. HAJI ASADULLA

S/O KHASIM SAB

AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

8 . SRI. IMTIYAZ

S/O SHA KHAN

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

9 . SRI. ABDULLA

S/O DODDA HONNUR SAB

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

10 . FAZULLA

S/O ALLABAKSHI

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

11 . NOOR AHMED

S/O ALLABAKSHI

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.

12 . SRI SUBAN SAB

S/O HUSEN SAB

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

13 MAMADI

S/O NABI SAB

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.

14 . NAHEEM

S/O ABDUL REHAMAN

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

146

15 . KHADAR BASHA

S/O ABBAS SAB

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

16 . HAJI LAL KHAJAHUSSAN

S/O DODDA HUNNUR SAB

AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

17 . SRI JEELAN

S/O RASOOL SAB

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

18 . SRI JABI

S/O BASAPUR RAZAK SAB

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

19 . MOHAMMED GHOUSE

S/O ALLAHA BAKSHI

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.

PETITIONERS 1 TO 19 ARE

R/AT SY. NO.32, RAMPUR

VILLAGE, MOLAKALMURU

TALUK, CHITRADURGA

DISTRICT - 577 535. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

MOLAKALMURU TALUK,

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 535.

147

3 . THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT

OFFICER (PDO), RAMPUR VILLAGE

MOALAKALMUR TALUK

CHITRADURGA - 577 535.

4 . DISTRICT WAKF OFFICER

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA 577 501.

5 . ABDUL BASHEER

S/O ABDUL AZEEZ

R/AT BB ROAD, 2ND WARD

RAMPUR VILLAGE, MOALAKALMUR

TALUKK CHITRADURGA - 577 535.

6 . R. NISAR AHMED

DEPUTY TAHSILDAR

RAMPUR VILLAGE, MOLAKALMUR

TALUK, CHITRADURGA

DISTRICT - 57 535.

7 . BELLARI VALISAB

S/O IBRAHIMSAB

AGE NO KNOWN.

8 . MASTAN SAB

S/O BELLARI VALISAB

AGE NO KNOWN.

9 . SAIFULLA

S/O MAHABOOB SAB

AGE NO KNOWN.

10 . MUJEEBUR REHAMAN

S/O JABBER SAB,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

11 . RAMESHA

S/O PARAMESHWARAPPA,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

12 . AZAM

148

S/O ABDUL HAFEEZ,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

13 . M D R DADU

S/O DOULA SAB,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

14 . MALLIKARJUNA

AGE NOT KNOWN.

15 . ASLAM

S/O RAHAMATH SAB,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

16 . AKRAM BASHA

S/O PESUMOM SAB,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

17 . FAKRU

S/O IMAN SAB,

AGE NOT KNOWN.

18 . MAHABOOB BASHA HIREHAL

S/O BASHA SAB,

AGE NOT KNOWN. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 & 2; SRI. M. ANAND KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-5; SRI. ASHWINI B.N, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 R-3, R-6 TO R-18 NOTICE NOT ORDERED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 PASSED BY THE R- 1 AS THE SAME IS HIGHLY ILLEGAL VIOLATIVE OFARTICLE 14, 19, 20, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

149

IN W.P. NO. 34675/2018:

BETWEEN:

MR. JAI KISHAN VIRWANI MANAGING DIRECTOR EMBASSY CLASSIC PRIVATE LIMITED NO.101/102, EMBASSY CHAMBER 5 VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJESH KUMAR S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE

REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER

N.R.CIRCLE,

BENGALURU-560 002. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; BY SRI. I.G. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE " SUO MOTU COMPLAINT INITIATED" AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29.06.2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT. KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009 IN L.G.C(S) NO.855 OF 2017 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS THEREAFTER PENDING BEFORE THE KARNATAKA

150

LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.35489/2018:

BETWEEN:

ADARSH DEVELOPERS NO.10, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER B. M. KARUNESH S/O LATE B MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR.CL. FOR SMT. LATHA S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTEMNT

M. S. BUILDING

BENGALURU-560001.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL) TALUK,

BENGALURU-560066

3 . K. H, CHANDRASHEKAR,

S/O LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

R/O KOLIPURA VILLAGE

JALA HALI

B. K. HALLI POST,

BENGALURU NORTH(ADDL) TALUK

BENGALURU-562149

4 . S. RAMACHANDRAIAH,

S/O LATE S MUNISWAMAPPA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

R/O UTTANAHALLI VILLAGE

151

JALA HOBLI CHIKKAJALA POST

BENGALURU NORTH(ADDL) TALUK

BENGALURU-562157

5 . S. L. NATARAJ

S/O S N LAKSHMINARAYANA DIXHIT

SIR M VISVESWARAIAH HOUSE

BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED

NO.35, FIRST FLOOR 5TH A CROSS

A SECTOR, YELAHANAK NEW TOWN

BENGALURU-560064 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP FOR R-1 AND R-2; BY SRI. B.S. ANILKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; R-4 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE EHT LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS NO. LGC(P) NO.310/ 2017 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4[3] OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PHOHIBITION ACT 2011 [ANNEXURE-B] AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 36459/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI C. GOVARDHAN REDDY

S/O. C. CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY,

AGRICULTURIST,

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

2 . SRI C. JANARDHAN REDDY

S/O. C. CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY,

AGRICULTURIST,

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

152

BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF

KOLAGAL VILLAGE,

BELLARY TALUK & DISTRICT-583 101

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAGHUPATHY T. N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

RENENUE DEPARTMENT,

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

STATION ROAD,

BELLARY-583 101.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR,

STATION ROAD,

BELLARY-583 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN NO. LGC[T] NO.319/2018 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT INITIATED AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 36539/2018:

BETWEEN:

153

SMT.PARVATHI W/O LATE MUTHU MOGERTHI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/AT DEVALGUNDA VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VIGHNESHWAR S SHASTRI, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M S BUILDING,

BANGALORE-560001

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

UDUPI DISTRICT,

UDUPI-576101

3 . TAHASILDAR

KUNDAPURA TALUK

UDUPI DISTRICT-576217 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO. LGC(G) NO. 1427/2017 AND ORDER DATED 18.07.2018 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR PREVENTION OF LAND GRABBING, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE, AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.

154

IN W.P. NO. 36737/2018:

BETWEEN:

N. B. POOVIAH S/O. BOPAIAH AGED 43 YEARS, KANDANGALA VILLAGE, VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 218 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJ S, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARANATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M. S. BUILDING

BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER,

VIRAJPET,

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI-571 218

3 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI-571 218

4 . TAHSILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI-571 218 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

155

PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS 273/2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 VIDE ANNX-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 36863/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT. PARVATHI NACHIAPPAN

W/O LATE R NACHIAPPAN

AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS

OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD

R/AT NO.7, ABHISHEK APARTMENTS

GANGAI STREET, BESENT NAGAR,

CHENNAI-600 090.

(NOTE: SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT

NOT CLAIMED BY THE PETITIONER)

2 . SRI. NACHIAPPAN RAMANATHAN,

S/O LATE RAMANATHAN NACHIAPPAN

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

OCC: AGRICULTURE,

R/AT KUMARAN ESTATE

HAKATTHUR, MADIKERI TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASANNA V. R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . THE PRINCIAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING,

DR.B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BENGALURU-560 001.

156

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

MADIKERI TALUK,

MADIKERI , KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO. LGC(G) NO. 265/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT-I, BENGALURU, AS NOTIFIED IN NOTIFICATION DATED 17.03.2018, VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 39179/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT K. A. MUTHAVVA W/O LATE SRI K. M. ACHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, W/O LATE K. M. ACHAIAH, R/OF BENGUR-IVOTHOKLU VILLAGE, MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT PENSION LANE, MADIKERI TOWN, KODAGU DISTRICT-571201 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.R. GOPALASWAMY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

MINISTRY OF URBAN & RURAL DEVELOPMENT,

REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,

VIKASA SOUDHA,

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BENGALURU-560001

157

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

MADIKERI TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571201

3 . THE COMMISSIONER

CITY MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,

MADIKERI,

KODAGU DISTRICT-571201

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.12.2017 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURTS AT BENGALURU VIDE NO. LGC (T) NO. LGC(T) NO. 1235/ 2017, O.S. NO. 98/2014 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 40311/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI Y.N. PADMANABHA SON OF Y. D. NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDENT OF LINGAPURA VILLAGE AREHALLI HOBLI, BELUR TALUK - 573121.

REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER SRI Y. N. MALLESHGOWDA SON OF Y. D. NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDENT OF LINGAPURA VILLAGE AREHALLI HOBLI, BELUR TALUK - 573121 ...PETITIONER

158

(BY SRI. SAMMITH S, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVANANDA S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

VIKASA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560001

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573219

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSONER

SAKALESHPURA SUB DIVISION

SAKALESHPURA - 573134

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

SAKALESHPURA TALUK

SAKALESHPURA - 573134 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED IN CASE NO. LGC (T) 110/2018, DATED 10.07.2018 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURTS AT BENGALURU AT ANNEX-G AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 41277/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. KESHAVAMURTHY K. C.

159

S/O SRI. CHIKKAPUTTAPPA, R/AT NO.86, K.NARAYANAPURA, KOTHANUR POST, K.R.PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560077 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. H.R. ANANTHA KRISHNAMURTHY, ADVOCATE )

AND:

THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 077. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 21.08.2017 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 43275/2018:

BETWEEN:

S.L. NATARAJ S/O S.N.LAKSHMINARAYANA DIXIT, AGED 52 YEARS, SRI M.VISVESWRAIAH HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, NO.35, FIRST FLOOR, 5TH 'A' CROSS, 'A' SECTOR, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN, BANGALORE-64. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. K. ACHARYA, ADVOCATE )

160

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA,

REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BANGALORE-560001.

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M.S.BUILDING,

DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEDHI,

BANGALORE-560001.

3 . K. H. CHANDRASHEKAR

S/O LATE HANUMANTHARAYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

R/O KOLIPURA VILLAGE,

JALA HOBLI,

B.K.HALLI POST,

BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK,

BANGALORE-562149.

4 . S. RAMACHANDRAIAH

S/O LATE S.MUNISWAMAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

R/O UTTANAHALLI VILLAGE,

JALA HOBLI,

CHIKKAJALA POST,

BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK,

BANGALORE-562157.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; BY SRI. B.S. ANILKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R4- SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCESS/ ORDER DATED 08.03.2018 PASSED IN LGC (P) 310/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION

161

SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND TO DECLARE THE SAME AS ILLEGAL AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 43352/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI PADMANABHAIAH @ PADMANABHACHARI S/O SRI NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O MYLANAHALLI HOBLI, JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH (ADNL) TALUK- 560064

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMPATH BAPAT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPT. OF REVENUE,

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU-560001.

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,

BENGALURU-560064.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR,

BENGALURU NORTH (ADNL) TALUK,

MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CASE NO.L.G.C.[G] NO. 233/2018

162

DATED 05.01.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-K PENDING ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.45660/2018:

BETWEEN:

PETITIONERS 1-8 ARE ALL RESIDENTS OF

DODDENAHALLI VILLAGE

GONDANAHALLI POST

163

BINDIGANAVILE POST

NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 432.

AND:

164

….RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT, 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 & 300-A; WHICH IS MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO. 47066/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI SHADAKSHARI MANAGING DIRECTOR, RAMANASHREE GROUP, RAJARAM MOHAN ROY ROAD, BENGALURU-25 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. H. R. ANANTHAKRISHNAMURTHY, ADVOCATE )

AND:

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER STROM WATER DRAIN SUB- DIVISION, YELAHANKA ZONE, BBMP, BENGALURU- 560 064 …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. I.G. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO (i)QUASH THE CASE ORDER IN LGC(S) NO.30/2017 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT (CH-2) PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE- H; (ii) FOR COSTS AND ANY OTHER RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND ETC.

165

IN W.P. NO. 47540/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. BASAVARAJAPPA SON OF LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT HANAGAWADI VILLAGE, SASVEHALLI HOBLI HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISRTRICT PIN CODE-577 224. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P. M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M S BUILDING

DR B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU-560 001

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

HONNALI TALUK

DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,

PIN CODE-577 201.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO

166

QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING IN CASE NO. LGC(G) NO. 837/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT-I, BENGALURU AS SUMMONS NOTICE DATED 01.08.2018 VIDE ANNX-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 47543/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. VEERESH RAO SON OF LATE LAKSHMANA RAO AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT HANAGAWADI VILLAGE SASVEHALLI HOBLI HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT PIN CODE-577 224 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P. M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M. S. BUILDING

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU-560 001

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

HONNALI TALUK

DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

PIN CODE-577 201

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

167

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO. LGC [G] NO. 835/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT-I, BENGALURU AS SUMMONS NOTICE DTD: 01.08.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 47827/2018:

BETWEEN:

NANJUNDAPPA S/O MALUR VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT RENUKALAHALLI VILLAGE, MANDIKAL HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562104 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S BUILDING,

BANGALORE-560001

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2 . THE TAHSHILDAR

CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK,

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101

3 . MOHAMMED HUSSAIN

S/O FAKRUDDIN SAB,

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

R/AT GUDIBANDE TOWN,

3RD WARD, 'A' BLOCK,

VINAYAKA NAGAR,

GUDIBANDE TALUK,

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561209

…RESPONDENTS

168

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI. M. ASWATHANARAYANA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT IN LGC [P] NO. 2132/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 47841/2018:

BETWEEN:

THE ADARSHA EDUCATION SOCIETY SAUNDATTI TALUK RAIBAGH BELAGAVI DISTRICT BY ITS CHAIRMAN IRAGOWDA PATIL S/O DHULA GOWDA PATIL ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. R. SREENIVASA PATAVARDHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M. S. BUILDING,

BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

RAIBAGH

RAIBAGH TALUK

BELGAVI DISTRICT-590 001 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

169

SMT. KAVITHA H C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (G) NO. 2457/2017 PENDING BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 49013/2018:

BETWEEN:

DORESWAMY S/O DODDAMANE NANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT ANCHEBEERANAHALLI VILALGE KIKKERI, HOBLI K. R. PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT PIN-571 423 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M S BUILDING

BANGALORE-560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

MANDYA DISTRICT

MANDYA

PIN CODE-571 401

3 . THE TAHSHILDAR

K. R. PET TALUK

MANDYA DISTRICT

MANDYA

PIN-571 426

170

4 . NAGENDRAPPA

S/O LATE HORATI NARASIMHE GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

RESIDING AT ANGOL VILLAGE

K. R. PET TALUK

PIN-571 426

5 . SRI. PUTTEGOWDA

S/O LATE TALEGOWDA

AGEDA BOUT 72 YEARS

RESIDING AT ANCHEBEERANAHALLI VILLAGE

KIKKERI, HOBLI

K. R. PETE TALUK

MANDYA DISTRICT

PIN-571 423 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SMT. CHANNAMMA.S, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; R-5 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT IN LGC(P) NO. 1234/2018, VIDE ANNEXURE-A DATED 22.06.2018 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 49786/2018:

BETWEEN:

C. T. NANAIAH S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGE 61 YEARS, KANOOR VILLAGE & POST, SOUTH KODAGU-571 216 ...PETITIONER

171

(BY SRI. KARUMBAIAH T. A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY CHIEF SECRETARY

TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BANGALORE-01

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M. S. BUILDING

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BANGALORE-01

REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI

KODAGU-571201

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

VIRAJPET KODAGU DISTRICT

KODAGU-571218 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-E THE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC[T] 336/2018 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT NO.II, BANGALORE AND ALL THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN LGC[T] NO.336/2018 AND ETC.

172

IN W.P. NO. 50668/2018:

BETWEEN:

B. T. SANJEEVAIAH S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT BILLINA KOTE VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562123 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. LOKESH S. G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . B S JAYARAM

S/O LATE SOMEGOWDA,

BILLINAKOTE SOMPURA HOBLI,

NELAMANGALA TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562123

2 . THE TAHASILDAR

NELAMANGALA TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562123

3 . THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

KULUVANAHALLI PANCHAYATH,

NELAMANGALA TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562123

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-2; SRI. AJAY M.D., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; R-3 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER I.E., ORDER DATED 23.10.2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR PROHIBITION OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

173

(COURT HALL NO.1) BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 51528/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI N. K. RAMANNA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

S/O LATE N K KRISHNASWAMY

RESIDING AT KOPPA TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

WORKING AS DEPUTY

TAHASILDAR KOPPA,

CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 126.

2 . SRI A. P. GANEYANAIK,

AGED 65 YEARS,

S/O LATE PEEKA NAIK,

VINAYAKANAGAR, TARIKERE

CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT-577 228

3 . SRI H. MALLAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,

S/O LATE HOCHILAPPA

R/AT RANGENAHALLI,

TARIKERE TALUK,

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 144

PETITIONER NOS 2 AND 3 NOT CLAIMING

THE BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENS.

...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G. R. MOHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU-560 001

174

2 . STATION HOUSE OFFICER

N R PURA CIRCLE POLICE

N R PURA TALUK,

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.07.2018 AS PER ANNEXURE-E IN L.G.C.[G] 691/17 PENDING BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT BENGALURU AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 52017/2018:

BETWEEN:

SMT. K. R. SHANTHA W/O. LATE SRI. K. P. SRINIVAS AND D/O. LATE SRI. K. C. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 65/2, RAM IYENGAR ROAD, V.V. PURAM, BENGALURU-560 004. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. B. K. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

REVENUE SECRETARY,

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

MULTISTORIED BUILDING,

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BANGALORE-560 001.

175

2 . THE REGISTRAR

SPECIAL COURT FOR

KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION,

III FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVANA,

K.G. ROAD,

BENGALURU-560 009.

3 . THE THASSILDAR

MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA BUILDING,

DEVANAHALLI,

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT- 56197.

4 . THE DEPUTY THASSILDAR

NADA KACHERI,

KUNDANA,

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-56197.

5 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

VISHWANATHAPURA CIRCLE,

VISHWANATHAPURA,

KUNDANA HOBLI,

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-56197.

6 . THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT

VISHWANATHAPURA CIRCLE,

VISHWANATHAPURA,

KUNDANA HOBLI,

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-56197.

GRABBING PROHIBITION

SPECIAL COURT

KHADAYA BHAVAN

3RD FLOOR, K.G. ROAD

BANGALORE-01. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1, R-3 TO R-6;

176

R-2 AND R-7 ARE DELETED V/O DT: 17.07.2019)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND NOTICE ANNEXURE-B DECLARING THAT THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED IN PURSUANCE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 IS VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 52106/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI. VENKATESH S/O LATE BETTEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/A NO.3 7TH CROSS, 60 FEET ROAD, J. C. NAGAR, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BANGALORE-560086 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BANGALORE-560001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA

PALIKE, N. R. SQUARE,

BANGALORE-560001

3 . SRI. MUNNEGOWDA,

S/O LATE AKKALLAPPA

R/AT NO.73, 7TH CROSS,

60 FEET ROAD, J. C. NAGAR

MAHALAKSHMIPURAM,

177

BANGALORE-560086 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; BY SRI. I.G. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; R-3 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C.[P] NO. 1532/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT ANNEXURE- H AND J AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 53025/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI A. N. RAMASWAMY, S/O LATE. A. NAGAPPA NAIK AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT KAGGA VILALGE, KASABA HOBLI BOMBALAPURA POST KOPPA TALUK-577120 CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER (BY SMT. RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M. S. BUILDING,

5TH FLOOR,

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BANGALORE-560 001

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

178

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

KOPPA RANGE

KOPPA-577120

CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.04.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE -A ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011, IN L.G.C.(G) NO. 509/2018 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 53049/2018:

BETWEEN:

G.S. MAHADEV S/O SONNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS GONUR VILLAGE, NARAYANAPURA POST, VIJAYAPURA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 135 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S.BUILDINGS,

DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BANGALORE-560 001.

179

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,

VISHWANATHAPURA,

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 110

3 . TAHSILDAR

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

DEVANAHALLI,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 110

4 . MUNIKEMPANNA

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS

S/O LATE KEMPANNA,

5 . ANAND KUMAR

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

S/O PRASANNA KUMAR

6 . G.V.VENKATASWAMMY

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

S/O VENKATAPPA,

7 . SRINIVAS GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

S/O CHOWDEGOWDA,

8 . G.N.LOKESH

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS

S/O NARAYANASWAMY,

9 . BASAPPA

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

S/O HANUMANTHAPPA,

10 . RAMANNA

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

S/O MUNISHAMAPPA,

11 . GANESH

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

S/O LATE KRISHANAPPA,

180

12 . R.MANJUNATH

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

S/O RAMANNA,

13 . ASWATH G.C.

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

S/O CHANNARAYAPPA,

14 . G.M.MANJUNATH

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

S/O MUNIYAPPA,

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF

GONUR AND GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE,

NARAYANAPURA POST,

VIJAYAPAURA HOBLI,

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 135.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SMT. K. SHEELA ANISH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 TO R-10 & R-12 TO R-14; R-11 SERVED & )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT IN LGC(P) NO. 208/2017 DATED 28.06.2017 AT ANNEX-J.

IN W.P. NO. 53204/2018:

BETWEEN:

K. S. DAYANANDSHETTY AGED 80 YEARS S/O SEENAPPA SHETTY T.D. HALLI , AREHALLI HOBLI,

181

BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573101. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOUTHAM A. R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

M.S. BUILDING,

BENGALURU - 560001.

2 . THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER,

HASSAN DISTRICT - 573201.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

SAKLESHPUR,

HASSAN DISTRICT - 573134.

4 . TAHSILDAR

BELUR TALUK,

HASSAN DISTRICT - 573115. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS NO.1121/2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-B DATED 26.09.2018 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 53534/2018:

BETWEEN:

182

1 . SMT A SHAKUNTALA

W/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS,

2 . D. M PADMANABHA

S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

3 . MR M MOHANSUNDAR

S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,

4 . MR. M RAJASHEKAR

S/O LATE H B MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

5 . DR. M CHANDRASHEKARA

W/O LATE H. B MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

ALL ARE R/A. NO.314 "DWARAKA"

INNER CIRLCE, WHITE FIELD,

NEAR K.R. PURAM HOBLI,

BENGALURU SOUTH-560 056

PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY

G.P.A. HOLDER,

SRI M. MOHANSUNDAR

S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA

AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,

R/A. NO.314 "DWARAKA"

INNER CIRCLE WHITE FILED

NEAR K. R. PURAM HOBLI

BENGALURU SOUTH -560 056 ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. MANMOHAN P. N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

183

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M. S. BUILDING BANGALORE-56001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

NO.4 EAST SUB DIVISION

BDA COMPLEX, HSR LAYOUT

BENGALURU-560075

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C ULLAL, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12.12.2017 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGALORE (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-V) AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BANGALORE (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-V) INCLUDING THE COMPLAINT DATED 16.11.2017 FILED BY THE R-2 (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-S) AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 53830/2018:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. VENKATESH,

S/O RAMAIAH

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.162

C.K.B. LAYOUT

BEHIND BIRIYANI ZONE

MARATHAHALLI

BENGALURU-560 037.

184

2 . SRI. THYAGAPPA,

S/O DODDA VENKATARAMAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.162

C.K.B. LAYOUT

BEHIND BIRIYANI ZONE

MARATHAHALLI

BENGALURU-560 037 ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. C.R. SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S. GREEN APARTMENTS ' REPRESENTED BY ITS LAND DEVELOPER YESHWARDHANA REDDY, S/O. LATE U. L. REDDY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.36 LAKE SHORE HOMES KASAVANAHALLI SARJAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 035 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. A. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.11.2018 PASSED IN LGC[S] NO/80/2017 BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT NO.1 BANGALORE AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 54914/2018:

BETWEEN:

MANJAPPAGOWDA S/O SHRINVASA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT HITTALUGADDE, MALLAPURA VILLAGE,

185

BAVIKAISERU POST, MANDAGADDE HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 220. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASAD B. S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S.BUILDING,

BANGALORE-560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2 . RANGE FOREST OFFICER

MANDAGADDE RANGE,

THIRTHAHALLI TALUK,

SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 220 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT LGC[G] NO. 882/2018 BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 55172/2018:

BETWEEN:

186

(BY SMT. RAKSHITHA V.N, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA RAO K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

187

SANDUR TALUK BALLARI DISTRICT - 583128

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. S.N. BHAT, ADVOCATE R-5 TO R-10)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT SEC. 9 (1) WITH REFERENCE TO CONFERRING THE JURISDICTION ON SPECIAL COURT UNDER THE ACT ON AN APPLICATION MADE BY ANY PERSON IS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ALSO SEC. 4 (3) AND SEC. 9 (5) (b) OF THE KARNATAKA ACT NO.38/2014 ARE VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 20 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

188

IN W.P. NO. 55214/2018:

BETWEEN:

K. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA R/AT NO.27/2, 2ND MAIN ATTIGUPPE, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 001 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. C.M. NAGABHUSHANA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 074 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

189

PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56168/2018:

BETWEEN:

190

PETITIONER NO.2 TO 10 RESIDING AT NO.10/1M SUNDERS ROAD CLEVELAND TOWN BANGALORE-560 005 ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SHAHUL HAMEED, ADVOCATE)

AND:

191

PILLEGOWDA GARDEN DARGAPURA WARD NO.07 DODDABALLAPUR TOWN-561 203 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. R.B. SADASIVAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56187/2018:

BETWEEN:

H M RAGHUNATH S/O H C MANAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOLEKOPPA BASAVANI VILLAGE, MUTHUR HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577432 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PARAMESWARAPPA C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

192

RESPONDENTS NO.5 TO 7 ARE RESIDENTS OF HOLEKOPPA BASAVANI POST, MUTHUR HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT-577 432

193

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56410/2018:

BETWEEN:

(BY SRI. H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B. KESHAAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

194

M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-01

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITITION ACT 2011 QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.10.2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION, SPECIAL COURT, 3RD FLOOR, KANDAYA BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BANGALORE COURT HALL NO.1 THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C. (P) NO.833/2017 AT ANNEX-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56539/2018:

BETWEEN:

M/S HIGHLAND ENTERPRISES A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA AGENT PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT:

195

THE FALCON HOUSE, NO 1, MAIN GUARD CROSS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR ARVIND PAI ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. UDAY HOLLA, SR. CL. FOR SRI. M.B. ANIRUDH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. ASHWINI S HALADY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITITION ACT 2011 (ANNEXURE-D) AND THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS, 2017 (ANNEXURE-E) IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND CONSEQUENTLY STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBATION ACT, 2011 AND THE KARNATAKA LAND

196

GRABBING

PTOHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS, 2017 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56542/2018:

BETWEEN:

PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT THE FALCON HOUSE,NO 1, MAIN GUARD CROSS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR ARVIND PAI ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. UDAY HOLLA, SR.CL., SRI.B.M.MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. ASHWINI S HALADY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

197

PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITITION ACT 2011 (ANNEXURE-D) AND THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS, 2017 (ANNEXURE-E) IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND CONSEQUENTLY STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AND THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS, 2017 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56545/2018:

BETWEEN:

VEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS S/O VEERABHADRAPPA R/O GOPALA BEERESHWARA VILLAGE LAKKAVALLI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT 577228.

RESPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER H.V. GANAPATHI GOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS S/O VEERAPPA GOWDA R/O GOPALA BEERESHWARA VILLAGE LAKKAVALLI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMGALURU DISTRICT 577228.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. CHIDAMBARA G.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

198

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 18.11.2017, VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. J.M.F.C., AT TARIKERE IN O.S.NO.98/2014 ON THE MEMO FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS AND THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2018, VIDE ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION, BENGALURU IN L.G.C., (T) NO.912/2018 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56630/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI H B DEVARAJU S/O LATE K T BOBEGOWDA AGED 55 YEARS R/AT HONNALLI MAGUNDI VILLAGE NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 314.

...PETITIONER

199

(BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CCH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56631/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI MANJUNATH GOWDA S/O KALASE GOWDA AGED 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT HONNALLI MAGUNDI VILLAGE,

200

NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT PIN-577134 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 & R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.LGC (G) NO.294/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56731/2018:

BETWEEN:

201

MANJUNATHA S/O RAMANNA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT HITTALUGADDE, HASANDURU VILLAGE MATTURU HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT PIN-57720

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRASAD B.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 56988/2018:

BETWEEN:

202

B YUVARAJ S/O. BASAPPA GOWDA, R/O. CHIKKAMANATI, PUNAJE GRAMA, HOSANAGARA TALUK 577 418. SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRUTHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

4 . THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST HOSANAGARA SUB DIVISION, HOSANAGARA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 418

203

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 57174/2018:

BETWEEN:

SRI TOKAPPA GOWDA S/O LATE KOLURAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURIST, R/O MUGUDTHI VILLAGE, HUMCHA HOBLI, HOSANAGARA TALUK. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH H.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

204

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 358/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.302/2019:

BETWEEN:

K. MUGILESHWARI W/O SUBRAMANI NAIDU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS AGRICULTURIST, R/O GOPALA VILLAGE, LAKKAVALLI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101

205

3 . THE TAHASILDAR, TARIKERE TALUK, TARIKERE-577228 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

4 . SECRETARY, THE COMMITTEE FOR REGULARIZATION OF UNAUTHORIZED CULTIVATION OF GOVERNMENT LANDS, TARIKERE TALUK, TARIKERE-577228 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

5 . REVENUE INSPECTOR LAKAVALI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, TARIKERE-577228 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

6 . VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT LAKAVALI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, TARIKERE-577228 CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO 3 R-5 & R-6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU IN PROCEEDINGS NO.LGCT(T)1987/2017 (O.S.NO.236/2014) VIDE ANNEXURE-F.

IN W.P. NO.1660/2019:

BETWEEN:

PADMAVATI & MEENAKSHI CHOULTRIES OF

206

SRI THIRUCHI SWAMIGAL CHARITABLE TRUST, A PUBLIC TRUST , RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR BENGALURU-560098 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE SRI JAYENDRAPURI SWAMI

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BENGALURU-560001

2 . THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER STORM WATER DRAIN BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE R.R. NAGAR, BANGALORE-560098.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. S.N PRASHANTH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLES 14, 19, 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL OF INDIA AT ANNEXRE-A; QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS NO. LGC(G) 1444/2017 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) R/W SECTION 5 OF THE

207

KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AT ANNEXURE-B.

IN W.P. NO.1680/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT. LAXMIDEVAMMA W/O LATE SRI. ANATHARAM AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

2 . SRI. M.A. SRIDHAR S/O LATE SRI. ANANTHARAM AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.200, R.V. ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENAGUDI, BENGALURU 560 004. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASHANTH H.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS KOPPA DIVISION, KOPPA, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 101.

3 . THE DIVSIIONAL FOREST OFFICER CHIKKAMAGALURU DIVISION, NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 101.

4 . THE TAHASILDAR TALUK OFFICE OF NARASIMHARAJAPURA, CHIKKAMAGALUR-577 101.

…RESPONDENTS

208

(BY SRI. PRBHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A; DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONER’S CASE IN NO.LGC (G) NO.597/2018 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS THEREUNDER; SET ASIDE THE ARREST WARRANT DATED 18.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL COURT UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARANTAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.2960/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. SRINIVAS V S/O LATE VENKATESHSPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT GANTAGANAHALLI VILLAGE SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST, YELAHANKA HOBLI BENGALURU-560064

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARSHA D. JOSHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE TAHSILDAR MINI VIDHANASOUDHA BENGALRU NORTH TALUK

209

(ADDITIONAL), YELAHANKA, BENGALURU – 560 064.

2 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR MINI VIDHANASOUDHA BENGALURU NORTH TALUK (ADDITIONAL), YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560 064.

3 . THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT COMPUTER PHANI ISSUING CENTRE, MINI VIDHANASOUDHA BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL) TALUK, YELAHANKA BENGALURU-560 064.

4 . SRI LAKSHMIAIAH S/O LATE KEMPAIAH MAJOR

5 . SRI SIDDARAMAIAH S/O LATE ERAPPA MAJOR

6 . SRI LINGAPPA S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA MAJOR

7 . SRI VARADARAJ S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA MAJOR,

8 . SRI A MURTHY S/O LATE ANJANPPA MAJOR

9 . SRI MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE HANUMAIAH MAJOR

ALL ARE RESIDING AT SINGAPUR VILLAGE

210

VIDYARANYAPUR POST, BENGALURU-560097.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. R.P. SOMASHEKARAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 TO R-8; R-9 SERVED )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE OREDER DATE 27.07.2018 IN LGC(S) NO.825/2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPCIAL COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURES-J AND K ARE AT PAGE 142 TO 155 & 156 TO 164 RESPECTIVELY AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW LGC(S)NO.825/2018 AS PRAYED FOR.

IN W.P. NO.3463/2019:

BETWEEN:

M.C. RAMEGOWDA S/O CHIKKEGOWDA, RESIDING AT MAKAVALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, K.R.PET TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571423.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571401.

211

3 . THE TAHSILDAR K.R.PET TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571426.

4 . EXECUTIVE ENGINEER HEMAVATHI IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SUB-DIVISION, KRISHNARAJPET, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571426. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300A. QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27.09.2018 PASSED BY KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU, IN LGC(T) 1064/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.3484/2019:

BETWEEN:

MR. JOSEPH P. CHERIAN S/O P.J.MAMMAN AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT VESHNAL PALTHAJE HOUSE KADABA HOBLI, PUTTUR TALUK SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT-574 201.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P.M, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

212

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001.

2 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU-560 001

3 . THE TAHSILDAR PUTTUR TALUK, SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT-577 201.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT DECLARE THAT SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 ARE UN-CONSTITUTIONAL AND STRIKE IT OUT AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.8.2017 PASSED IN CASE NO.1378/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT-I, BENGALURU ANNEXURE-C.

IN W.P. NO.5393/2019 :

BETWEEN:

B. KRISHNA REDDY S/O BHADRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/O YARANDAHALLI VILLAGE JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS.V, ADVOCATE)

213

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BMTF POLICE STATION BENGALURU-560001. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 23.01.2019 PASSED IN LCG(T) NO.925/2017 ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION.

IN W.P. NO.5576/2019 :

BETWEEN:

1 . SHRI. CHANAPPA SON OF LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 5/398, SHREE LAKSHMIVENAKTESHWARA NILAYA ANJANAPPA LAYOUT, DHODABOMSANDRA POST BENGALURU – 560097.

2 . SHRI. K.G. CHANDRASHEKAR SON OF K.K. GANAPATHI AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 12, DHODABOMASANDRA POST ANJANAPPA LAYOUT, VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU - 560097

214

3 . SHRI. SRINIVAS SON OF R. VENKATARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NO 13, LAKSHMIVENAKTESHWARA NILAYA ANJANAPPA LAYOUT, DODDA BOMMASANDRA BENGALURU – 560097. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, 5TH FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . THASILDHAR BANGALORE NORTH (ADDITIONAL) YELAHANKA, BENGALURU.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION IN CASE NO.LGC(S)NO.243/2017 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.7440/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI RAVI S/O SHANMUKAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

215

R/AT JAMBALLI VILLAGE DEDDARIPURA POST HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 346.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASHANTH H.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201

3 . THE TAHASILDAR TALUK OFFICE OF HOSANAGARA SHIVAMOGGA-577 401

4 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER HOSANAGARA RANGE, HOSANAGARA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 418. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONER’S CASE IN NO.LGC(G) NO.1244/2017 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS THEREUNDER VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

216

IN W.P. NO.7844/2019 :

BETWEEN:

SRI K.R. KRISHNAM RAJU S/O LATE K.RANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT NO.144, 12TH CROSS J.P.NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 078. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SR.CL. FOR SRI. DAYANAND S PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, BY ITS SECRETARY, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.

2 . THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (SOUTH) BBMP, 2ND FLOOR, JAYANAGAR SHOPPING COMPLEX, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 041.

3 . THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE-566 001.

4 . SIR.SRINIVAS Y S/O LATE M.C.YOGANARASIMAIAH AGE MAJOR, R/AT NO.141/1, 24TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS MARENAHALLI, J.P.NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 078.

5 . SRI.ROLAND SOANS.A S/O AGUSTIN SOANS.F AGE MAJOR, R/AT NO.110, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, ADUGODI POST, VINAYAKANAGARA BANGALORE-560 030.

217

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA, AND SMT. KAVITHA H C, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SMT. TEJASWINI. S, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU, (COURT NO.2) IN PROCEEDINGS NO.LGC (P) NO.2637/2017 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

IN W.P. NO.8176/2019:

BETWEEN:

PETITIONERS (1) TO (3) ALL C/O M/S. CHAITHANYA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.104, PRESTIGE OMEGA 3RD FLOOR, EPIP ZONE, WHITEFIELD

218

BENGALURU - 560 066.

...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.S. DWARAKANATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

KANTIMAT AGE MAJOR FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, AT HOTEL SHARAVATHI NEAR NEW BUS STOP, SAUDATTI DISTRICT, SAUDATTI TALUK BELAGAVI - 591 126.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH SECTIONS 4(3), 9, 4(2), 9(5)(B), 9(7), 9(5)(C), 9(8), 11, 20 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING (PROHIBITION) ACT OF 2011 AS ULTRA VIRES TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND CONSEQUENTLY, TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN (1)LGC(P).NO.1464/2017

219

REGARDING SY.NO.161/1 AND SY.NO.161/2, (2)LGC(P).NO.1465/2017 REGARDING SY.NO.155 AND SY. NO.156 AND (3)LGC(P).NO.1466/2017 REGARDING SY.NO.146/1, SY.NO.146/2 AND SY.NO.146/3, BEFORE THE SPECIAL COURT FOR PROHIBITION OF LAND GRABBING (COURT HALL NO.2) BENGLAURU, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU AT ANNEXRUE-A1 TO A3.

IN W.P. NO.8298/2019 :

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. SRIDHAR NAIDU S/O.R.G.S.NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.R.S.ROCK SAND, A PARTNERSHIP CONCERN, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.301, CENTINI PLAZA, VASAVI LAYOUT, CHALLAGHATTA, BENGALURU-560037.

2 . SRI R RAJESH @ RAJESH NAIDU S/O SRI SIRIDHAR NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S..R.S.ROCK SAND, A PARTNERSHIP CONCERN, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.301, CENTINI PLAZA, VASAVI LAYOUT, CHALLAGHATTA, BENGALURU-560037.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. A MADHUSUDHANA RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,

220

REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGLURU-56001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISISONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563 101

3 . SRI VIJAYANNA THE TAHASILDAR, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR-563 101.

4 . SRI. V.M. RAMESH S/O V M MUNIYAPPA, MAJOR, B-1ST BLOCK, VEMAGAL VILLAGE AND POST, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563 101.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3 )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PETITIONERS [ PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-U]; TO QUASH THE IMPUNGED SUMMONS DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, IN CASE NO.LGC(P) NO.141/2018 [PRODUCED AS ANNEXURES-R AND S].

IN W.P. NO.8821/2019 :

BETWEEN:

1 . AKADADA LAKSHMAPPA S/O DODDAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

2 . KARIGANURU GUTHYAPPA

221

S/O NANDYAVVA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

3 . PAMENAHALLI NAGENDRAPPA S/O HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

4 . SRI SALYAKKI RUDRAPPA S/O BHEEMAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

5 . HADADI KAMALAPPA S/O BHEEMAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 5 ARE RESIDENT OF BELALAGERE VILLAGE CHENNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.

6 . NARAYANA NAIKA S/O KIRIYA NAYAKA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,

7 . MUKESH NAIKA S/O TOLACHA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

PETITIONER NOS. 6 AND 7 ARE RESIDENT OF KAVALITHANDA VILLAGE CHENNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.

8 . KURKI SIDDAPPA S/O OBALAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

9 . KURKI THIUPPESHAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

10 . THIMMENAHALLI THIPPESHAPPA

222

S/O CHENNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC:FARMER

11 . MATTI ANJANAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC:FARMER

12 . DODDAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC:FARMER

13 . CHANDRAPPA S/O THIMMENAHALLI CHENNABASAPPA (B5) AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

14 . ANNAPPA @ KENGA DODDAPPARA ANNAPPA OCC:FARMER AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS

15 . KANNI DODDAPPA S/O BHEEMAPPA (B9) AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

16 . KOLENAHALLI SRINIVASA S/O BHEEMAPPA (C1), AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

PETITIONER NOS. 8 TO 16 ARE RESIDENT OF BELALAGERE VILLAGE CHENNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. KALEEMULLAH SHARIFF, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

223

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE-577001.

3 . THE TAHSILDAR CHENNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577213.

4 . THE SENIOR FARM SUPERINTENDENT AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION KATHALAGERE-577 219 CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3 R-4 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU IN LGC(T) NO.2414/2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND LGC(T) NO.2415/2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G1 BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI.

IN W.P. NO.8852/2019 :

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT. K.N. NAGARATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O LATE ASHWATH NARAYANAGOWDA SANTHEHALLI VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT.

2 . S.R. VENKATEGOWDA

224

AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O LATE RAMACHNDREGOWDA SANTHEHALLI VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK. KOLAR DISTRICT.

3 . S.R. VENKATARAMANAGOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O LATE RAMACHANDREGOWDA SANTHEHALLI VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT.

4 . SMT. INDIRAMMA W/O LATE S.L. NANDAKUAMR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, SANTHEHALLI VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK. KOLAR DISTRICT.

5 . S.R. SAMPANGIRAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, S/O RAMACHANDREGOWDA SANTHEHALLI VILLGE, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVANNA A. G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR-563 101.

3 . THE TAHASILDAR MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563 130.

4 . ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563 130.

…RESPONDENTS

225

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H C, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES OF ARTICLES 14, 19 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS PER ANNEXURE-A; QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT BENGALURU IN PROCEEDINGS LGC(P) NO.2237/2017 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND BRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AS PER ANNEXURE-B.

IN W.P. NO.9158/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . SRI. B.K. VENUGOPAL

S/O LATE B.T. KEMPANNA

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.

2 . SMT. SABITHA VENUGOPAL

W/O SRI. B.K. VENUGOPAL

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.

BOTH ARE R/O HOUSE NO.17/1

SRI. SAMPANGI RAMASWAMY

TEMPLE STREET, CUNNINGHAM

ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 052. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SREEPADA H.R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

226

BENGALURU - 560 001

REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

D.C. COMPOUND, BEHIND KANDAYA

BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 009.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION

KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 009.

5 . THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 009.

6 . SRI HEMANTHRAJU

S/O LATE MUNIRAJU

AGE MAJOR,

R/A NO 32, ESHWAR TEMPLE

ROAD, RAMOHALLI KENGERI

TALUK, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

BANGALURU - 560 074.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-5; R-6 SERVED AND )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

227

PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT (KARNATAKAK ACT NO. 38/2014), IN UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.10906/2019:

BETWEEN:

D.N. KUMAR S/O NANJUNDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS DEVEGPWDAMALPALU VILLAGE HULIKERE POST, KASABA HOBLI NAGAMANGALA TQ - 571 432. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. R.S. RAVI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL

HUSBANDRY, M.S. BUILDING

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

AMRUTH MAHAL BREEDING CENTER

AJJAMPURA, ARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMANGALURU

DISTRICT - 577 228.

228

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

NAGAMANGAL TALUK

NAGAMANGALA

MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 432.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT, 38/2014) AS ULTRA VIRES OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A VIDE ANNX-A.

IN W.P. NO.11090/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. M.R. LAKSHMANAPPA S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.130/4 80 FEET RAOD, KHB COLONY BASAVESHWARA NAGARA BENGALURU - 560 079. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. T. SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

229

2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BEGNALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

5 . THE REGISTRAR

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COURT

FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

PROHIBIITON, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH OF THE ENTIRE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING ACT, 2011 IN CASE NO. L.G.C. (S) 66/2017 VIRTUE OF THE ISSUANCE NOTICE/SUMMONS DATED 04.02.2017 WHICH IS FOUND AT ANNEXURE-Q TO THE WRIT PETITION.

IN W.P. NO.11091/2019:

BETWEEN

SMT. PARVATHAMMA

230

W/O M.R. LAKSHMANAPPA R/AT NO.130/4, 80 FEET ROAD KHB COLONY, BASAVESHWARA NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 079. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. T. SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

5 . THE REGISTRAR

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COURT

FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

PROHIBITION, K.G. ROAD

BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA, And SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

231

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING ACT, 2011 IN CASE NO. L.G.C. (S) 67/2017 VIRTUE OF THE NOTICE DATED 04.02.2017 VIDE ANNX-G TO THE WP.

IN W.P. NO.12900/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. SANJEEVA K SHETTY S/O LATE KORAGA SHETTY HARISAGAR MADRA GUTTHU SHIMANTHOOR VILLAGE MANGALORE TALUK - 574 215. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR

ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

D.K. DISTRICT, MANGALORE

TALUK - 575 001.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

D.K. DISTRICT, MANGALORE

TALUK - 575 001.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

MULKI, MANGALORE TALUK

D.K. DISTRICT - 575 121.

232

5 . THE P.D.O.

KILPADY GRAM PANCHAYATH

MULKI, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 144.

6 . NARSU MUKARI

S/O AITHA MUKHARI

AGED MAJOR

R/AT SHIMANTHUR

VILLAGE, MULKI HOBLI

MANGALORE TALUK - 574 144.

7 . KANTHU MUKHARI

S/O BAIRA MUKHARI

AGED MAJOR

R/AT SHIMANTHUR VILLAGE

MULKI HOBLI

MANGALORE TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 AND 5 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.11.2014, 24.06.2014, 16.02.2015 AND 21.09.2016 MADE BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNX-A TO A-3.

IN W.P. NO.12974/2019:

BETWEEN:

P.D. PONNAPPA S/O LATE DEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT PALANGALA VILLAGE KARADA POST, VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 212. ...PETITIONER

233

(BY SRI. KARUBAIAH T.A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BANGALORE - 1.

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

VIKAS SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR

ROAD, BANGALORE - 1

BY ITS SECRETARY.

3 . TAHSILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

VIRAJPET, KODAGU

DISTRICT - 571 218.

4 . P.A. POOVAIAH

S/O LATE AIYAPPA

PALANGALA VILLAGE

KARADA POST, VIRAJPET

TALUK, KODAGU

DISTRICT - 571 212. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP; SRI. N.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. N.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-E THE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (P) 1534/2018 DATED 27.09.2018 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT-A, BANGALORE.

234

IN W.P. NO.12975/2019:

BETWEEN:

P.D. PONNAPPA S/O LATE DEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT PALANGALA VILLAGE KARADA POST, VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 212. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. KARUBAIAH T.A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BANGALORE - 1.

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

VIKAS SOUDHA

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BANGALORE - 1

BY ITS SECRETARY.

3 . TAHSILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

VIRAJPET, KODAGU

DISTRICT - 571 218.

4 . P.A. POOVAIAH

S/O LATE AIYAPPA

PALANGALA VILLAGE

KARADA POST, VIRAJPET

TALUK, KODAGU

DISTRICT - 571 212. …RESPONDENTS

235

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. N.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-D THE PROCEEDING SIN LGC (P) 1537/2018 DATED 27.09.2018 PENDING ON THE IFLE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT-1, BANGALORE.

IN W.P. NO.13029/2019:

BETWEEN:

MOOSAVEER @ IBRAHIM SAB S/O SULEMAN SAB AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O MUNDAGALI HARA, KUNDUR POST MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 132. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. LOHITASWA BANAKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY LAW AND PARLIAMENTARY

AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE - 560 001

REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

3 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

236

ALDUR DIVISION

ALDUR, MUDIGERE TALUK

CHIKKMAGALUR - 577 132.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION AC T2011 AS ULTRA VIRES, THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.13280/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT. YASHODHAMMA

W/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA

AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS

R/AT NO.122, MUNESHWARA SWAMY

TEMPLE STREET, KODIHALLI

BANGALORE - 08.

2 . SRI. M. RAJAPPA

S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

R/AT NO.122, MUNESHWARA SWAMY

TEMPLE STREET, KODIHALLI

BANGALORE - 08.

3 . SRI. M. RAMACHANDRA

S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

R/AT NO.122, MUNESHWARA

SWAMY TEMPLE STREET

KODIHALLI, BANGALORE - 08.

4 . SRI. M. VENUGOPAL

237

S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

R/AT NO.122, MUNESHWARA SWAMY

TEMPLE STREET, KODIHALLI

BANGALORE - 08. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. BASAVANNA M.D, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE - 560 020. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED IN LGC (T) NO. 1503/2018 DATED 05.02.2019 ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BANGALORE PRODUCE AT ANNEXURE-N.

IN W.P. NO.13405/2019:

BETWEEN:

B.S. BIDDAPPA S/O B.T. SUNNY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT KANDANGALA VILLAGE, VIRAJPETE TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 218.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. HARISH G, ADVOCATE)

AND:

238

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI - 571 201.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

VIRAJPET TALUK

KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 218.

4 . THE TAHASILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 218. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VOILATIVE FO ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.13737/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI Y M TRIBHUVAN SATHWIK S/O Y N MALLESHGOWDA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDENT OF LINGAPURA VILLAGE AREHALLI HOBLI BELUR TALUK

239

HASSAN DISTRICT-573 121.

REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER SRI Y N MALLESHGOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDENT OF LINGAPURA VILLAGE AREHALLI HOBLI BELUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573 121. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. SAMMITH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVANANDA S, ADVCOATE)

AND:

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITIONJ ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A OF THE

240

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.14457/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. A.M. PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE. MUTHAPPA NALVOTHOKLUL VILLAGE AMMATHI HOBLI, VIRAJPET TALUK - 571 218 KODAGU DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. N. RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

5TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001

REP BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

VIRAJPET - 571 218

KODAGU DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA, AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C, HCGP)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES AND BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 & 300-A OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.18151/2019:

BETWEEN:

241

SREE SRINGERI SHIVAGANGA SHARAD MUTT, SHIVAGANGA, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

(BY SRI P.N.MANMOHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. S. NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT

242

38/2014) IS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IN ALTERNATIVE ISSUE A DECLARATION THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT- 2011 IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PETITIONER (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-N) AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.20311/2019

BETWEEN:

SRI HARISH S/O PUTTANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT JADDA GADDA MAJARE TRIAYAMBHAKAPURA GRAMA, AGRAHARA HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUQ, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN-577432 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. B. KESHAVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

243

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CAS NO.LGC (S) NO.1160/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.20312/2019

BETWEEN:

SRI DUGGAPPA GOWDA S/O VENKATAIAH GOWDA RESIDING AT JADD GADDE MAJARE TRIAYAMBHAKAPURA GRAMA AGRAHARA HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUQ SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN 577432

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI B.KESHAVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

244

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CAS NO.LGC (S) NO.1161/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.20313/2019

BETWEEN:

SRI SATISHA S/O BACHANAIKA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT JADDA GADDE MAJARE TRIAYAMBHAKAPURA GRAMA AGRAHARA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN - 577432 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI B.KESHAVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

245

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CAS NO.LGC (S) NO.1156/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-2 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.20314/2019

BETWEEN:

SRI SUDHAKAR S/O VENKATAIAH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT JADDA GADDE MAJARE TRIAYAMBHAKAPURA GRAMA, AGRAHARA HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUQ SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN-577432 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI B.KESHAVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

246

THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN - 577432

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.LGC (S) NO.1159/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.20315/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI BHASKARA S/O BACHANAIKA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT JADDA GADDE MAJARE TRIAYAMBHAKAPURA GRAMA, AGRAHARA HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUQ SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN-577432 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI B. KESHAVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

247

BENGALURU - 560001

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.LGC (S) NO.1157/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.20316/2019

BETWEEN:

SRI JAYARAM S/O PTTANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT JADDAGADDE MAJARE TRIAYAMBHAKAPURA GRAMA, AGRAHARA HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUQ SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT PIN-577432 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI B.KESHAVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

248

REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING, DR BR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560001

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PRABHULING K.NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.LGC (S) NO.1158/2018 FROM THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU CH-1 AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 22667/2019:

BETWEEN:

N. SANTHOSH KUMAR S/O K. NARAYANA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/A NO.141/7/8,4TH MAIN KATHRIGUPPA EAST, BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE BENGALURU-560085

REP BY ITS SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K. NARAYANA REDDY S/O LATE KONNAPPA REDDY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/A NO.141/7/8, 4TH MAIN, KATHRIGUPPA EAST, BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE BENGALURU-560085 ...PETITIONER

249

(BY SRI. RAHUL S REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPD BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE VIDE ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IN CASE NO. LGC(T). 1350/2018 DTD: 25.10.2018 AND ETC

IN W.P. NO. 22678/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . KRISHNA

S/O THIMMANNA,

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

EMPLOYEE IN SURVEY DEPARTMENT,

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

2 . R MANJUNATHA

S/O RANGAPPA,

250

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

RETIRED EMPLOYEE,

WATERMAN,

MUDUGODU GRAMA PANCHAYATI

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101.

3 . SMT. SHARADAMMA

W/O THIMMANAIKA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

EMPLOYEE, HEALTH DEPARTMENT,

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101.

4 . SHIVAJI NAIKA

S/O ESHWAR NAIKA

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

EMPLOYEE, LINEMAN, MESCO

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

5 . SMT. K. PADMA

W/O LATE VITTALA RAO

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

HOUSEHOLD WORK

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

6 . NATRAJ

S/O H.KARIYAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,

251

TEACHER, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

7 . M.C.RENUKARADHYA

S/O CHANDRASHEKARAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,

EMPLOYEE, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

8 . R.V. VENKATESHAPPA

S/O LATE VENKATAIAH

AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS

AGRICULTURIST

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

9 . MAHADEVAPPA

S/O LATE BHYRAIAH

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

RETIRED EMPLOYEE

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. YATHISH J NADIGA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

252

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BANGALORE-560001

2 . THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

MUDUGODU GRAMA PANCHAYATI,

MUDUGODU-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

3 . SURESHA

S/O LATE SEETHARAMAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

EMPLOYEE, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT,

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

4 . KUMARARADHYA

S/O CHANDRASHEKARAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,

RETIRED TEACHER

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

5 . SMT. MALLIGA

D/O KRISHNAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

ANGGANAVADI TEACHER,

C.D.P.O DEPARTMENT,

R/O IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERS,

MUDUGODU VILLAGE-577144

LAKKAVALLI HOBLI,

TARIKERE TALUK

253

CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1; R2, R3 & R5- SERVED & )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2019 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, COURT HALL NO.2, AT BANGALORE IN LGC(T) NO.883/2018 IN O.S.NO.373/2014 PRODUCED HEREWITH ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 22935/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. S BAGHIRATHA S/O LATE H SADASHIVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT KADABAGERE VILLAGE, DASANAPURA HOBLI 562162, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. JEEVAN KUMAR B. S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU-560001

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,

254

KHANDAYA BHAWAN,

KEMPEGOWDA ROAD,

BENGALURU-560009

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2019 IN PETITION LGC(S) 15/2016 AND PETITION NO. LGC(S)44/2016 (ANNX-A AND B) IS IN VIOLATION OF THE UNDERLYING STATUTE, IN GROSS VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND OPPOSED TO PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.

IN W.P. NO. 22988/2019:

BETWEEN:

A C SOMANNA S/O CHEEYANNA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS RESIDENT OF HAKATHUR VILLAGE & POST KODAGU-571252

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BOJANNA K. J., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY

TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

VIDHANA SOUDHA

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU-560001

2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

255

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M. S. BUILDING

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD

BENGALURU-560001

REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI

KODAGU-571201

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

MADIKERI TALUK

MADIKERI

KODAGU DISTRICT

KODAGU-571218 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS 263/2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA

W/O MUNIRAJU,

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD

MARENAHALLI,

VIJAYANAGARA

256

BENGALURU-560 040.

2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU

S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH

S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

4 . SRI.D.KRISHNA RAJU

S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

5 . SRI.D.SHANKARAPPA

S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

6 . SRI.DHANANJAYA

S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

PETITIONERS NO.2 TO 6 ARE RESIDING AT

CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,

TAVAREKERE HOBLI,

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-562 130

7 . SRI.S.T.KUBERA SWAMY

S/O THAMMANNA GOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

8 . SRI.S.T.RAMESH

S/O THAMMANNA GOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

PETITIONER NO.7 AND 8 ARE RESIDING AT

DEVAMACHOHALLI VILLAGE,

TAVAREKERE HOBLI & POST

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK.

9 . SRI.J.N.SOMESHWARA

257

S/O LATE J.B.NINGAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

10 . SMT.R.SUJATHA

W/O J.N.SOMESHWARA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

11 . SMT. DIVYA S.GOWDA

W/O S.V.VIKRAM,

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

PETITIONERS NO.10 & 11 ARE REPRESENTED

BY THEIR GPA HOLDER.

SRI.J.N.SOMESHWARA

S/O LATE J.B.NINGAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

PETITIONER NO.9,10 & 11 ARE

R/AT NO.91/41, 15TH CROSS,

11TH MAIN, PADMANABHANAGAR,

BENGALURU-560 070.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

VIDHANA SOUDHA,

BENGALURU-560 001.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,

KHANDAYA BHAWAN,

KEMPEGOWDA ROAD,

BENGALURU-560 009.

…RESPONDENTS

258

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES TO ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19 AND ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 2001 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS ANNX-C AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 23573/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . B.V. PARSHWANTH PRAKASH

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

2 . B. V. SHANTHI PRASAD

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

3 . B. V. AMITH KUMAR

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

4 . B. V. AJITH PRASAD

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

SONS OF LATE B. S. VASUDEVA JAIN

ALL ARE R/O AMBEDKAR COLONY ROAD,

BELLUR VILLAGE AND HOBLI,

NAGAMANGALA TALUK

PIN - 571418 ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. N. SUKUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

259

M. S. BUILDINGS

5TH FLOOR,

DR AMBEDKAR ROAD,

BENGALURU - 560001

BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

GRAM PANCHAYAT

BELLUR, BELLUR VILLAGE AND HOBLI,

NAGAMANGALA TALUK

PIN - 571418

3 . TAHSILDAR

OFFICE OF TAHSILDAR

NAGAMANGALA TALUK & TOWN

PIN - 571418

4 . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OFFICE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

SUB-DIVISION OF PANDAVAPURA

MANDYA DISTRICT

PIN - 571434

5 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

MANDYA DISTRICT

PIN - 571401

6 . B. S. GOWDAYA BIN LATE H. L.

SHIVARAMAYYA, AGED 66 YEARS

BELLUR VILLAGE AND HOBLI,

NAGAMANGALA TALUK

MANDYA DISTRICT PIN - 571418

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1, R3 TO R5; R2 & R6 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

260

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.11.2017- ANNX-"A" ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL COURT CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IN CASE NO. LGC (P): 166/2017 AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 27336/2019:

BETWEEN:

GOPALARAJU M L S/O LATE LAKSHMANARAJU AGED 51 YEARS, MYLANAHALLI VILLAGE, JHALA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL) TALUK BENGALURU NORTH DISTRICT-562 149 ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S. V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU-560001

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

BENGALURU-560001

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL ) TALUK

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

BENGALURU-560001

…RESPONDENTS

261

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CASE NO.L.G.C.(G) NO.217/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-H PENDING ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 27597/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI VASANTH KUMAR S/O MURGESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDENT OF BHAGAVALLI VILLAGE TARIKERE TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577201

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M S BUILDING

DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU-560 001

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKKAMAGALUR-577201

3 . THE TAHSILDAR

262

TARIKERE TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577201

4 . THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

AJAMPUR POLICE STATION

TARIKERE TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577201

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC [T] NO.2048/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AS PER ANNEXURE-D, AS WITHOUT COMPETENCE AND JURISDICTION AND OTHERWISE BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO. 27625/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . RAMA

S/O LATE HANUMANTHA RAMA NAIK,

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

OCC: AGRICULTURE (COOLIE)

R/AT HIREBAIL VILLAGE POST MUTTA,

HONAVAR TALUK-581334

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT

2 . KRISHNA

S/O HANUMANTHA NAIK

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

OCC: AGRICULTURE (COOLIE)

R/AT HIREBAIL VILLAGE POST MUTTA,

HONAVAR TALUK-581334

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT

3 . SMT. LAKSHMI ESHWAR NAIK

263

W/O LATE ESHWAR NAIK

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

OCC: AGRICULTURE (COOLIE)

R/AT HIREBAIL VILLAGE POST MUTTA,

HONAVAR TALUK-581334

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. VIGHNESHWAR S SHASTRI, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

KARWAR,

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581301

3 . TAHASILDAR

HONAVARA TALUK,

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581334

4 . THE REVENUE INSPECTOR

MAVINKURVA, HONAVARA TALUK,

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581334

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH

THE COMPLAINT, FIR AND CHARGESHEET FILED IN C.C.NO.390/2015 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

264

HONVARA NOW CONTINUE IN PROCEEDINGS AS PER ANNEXURE-A, B AND C RESPECTIVELY.

IN W.P. NO. 27680/2019:

BETWEEN:

B T KANTHARAJ S/O THAMMAYYA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT SALUR VILLAGE NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRUTHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M S BUILDING

BENGALURU-560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2 . THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

CHIKKAMAGALURU DIVISION

CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101

3 . DEPUTY FOREST OFFICER

KOPPA DIVISION

KOPPA

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577126

4 . ASSISTANT FOREST OFFICER

KOPPA DIVISION

KOPPA

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577126

5 . REGIONAL FOREST OFFICER

265

NARASIMHARAJA REGION

NARASIMHARAJAPURA-577134

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

6 . THE TAHASILDAR

NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK

NARASIMHARAJAPURA

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577134

7 . B. T. PRAKASH

S/O THAMMAYYA GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

AGRICULTURIST

R/AT HANTHUVANE

HONNEKODIGE VILALGE

HONNEKODIGE POST

NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577134

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI.V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1 TO R6; R7 - SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT-II BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEXURE-J.

IN W.P. NO.27730/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI M.PHILIP S/O C.P.MATTAI AGED ABUT 74 YEARS RETIRED EMPLOYEE (DRIVER IN PWD) R/O. HOUSE NO.7/A, WARD NO.32, OPP. TO BLOCK EDUCATION

266

OFFICE STAFF ROAD FORT, MAIN ROAD BELLARY-583 101. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. HALESHA R.G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.5.2019 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU IN L.G.C.(T) NO.890/2018 (OS NO.159/2015) VIDE ANNEXURE-E.

IN W.P. NO.27921/2019:

BETWEEN:

BOTH ARE R/O. HAYA VILLAGE SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 429.

267

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. CHIDAMBARA G.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO LAND GRABBING ON THE PART OF HE PETITIONES IN RESPECT OF LAND IN QUESTION OF RESPECT OF 2 ACRES EACH OF LAND IN SY NO.18 OF HAYA VILLAGE, SORABA TALUK. TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN L.G.C.(G)662/2018 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION.

IN W.P. NO.28421/2019:

BETWEEN:

JAGADISHA S/O DYAVE GOWDA

268

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS IDALLI VILLAGE KANATHI POST CHIKMAGALUR TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 111.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.R.RAVIKUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA-VIRES ARTICLES 14, 19, 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A); QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE KARANATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU IN PROCEEDINGS DATED 16.11.1997 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 33 AND 73 KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963, RULE 25, 42, 43 KARNATAKA FOREST RULES, 1969, COLUMN NO.2 THE FOREST CONSERVATION ACT 1980 AND SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (ANNEXURE-B).

IN W.P. NO.28900/2019:

269

BETWEEN:

C.T.NANAIAH S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS KANOOR VILLAGE & POST SOUTH KODAGU-571 216.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.A.KARUMBAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

270

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-E THE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(T) NO.303/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT NO.I, BENGALURU; DECLARE THAT SECTIONS 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 AND 9 OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

IN W.P. NO.29471/2019:

BETWEEN:

PALEKANDA JYOTHI POOVAIAH W/O LATE POOVAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS KANNANGALA VILLAGE VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 218.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.A.KARUMBAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

271

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT SECTIONS 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 AND 10 OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND STRIKE DOWN THE SAID PROVISIONS. TO QUASH ANNEXURE-B THE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(G) NO.1939/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT-I, BENGALURU.

IN W.P. NO.29604/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI SURYANARAYANA S/O LATE SRI SRINIVASA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS GUBBIBAIL, JAYAPURA POST KOPPA TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 123.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHAMANNA B.H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1)

272

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRAVIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21 AND 300A AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE; DECLARING THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONERS CASE IN L.G.C.(G) NO.279/2019.

IN W.P. NO.29668/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI SANTOSH A SHETTY S/O ANAND SHETTY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST RESIDING OF CHIKKA AGRAHARA POST MEGHARAMAKKI N.R.PURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-567 201.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

273

N.R.PURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-567 201.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(T) NO.140/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AS PER ANNEXURE-H, AS WITHOUT COMPETENCE AND JURISDICTION AND OTHERWISE BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID; DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS TO ARTICLES 14, 19, 21 AND 300A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS ANNEXURE-J.

IN W.P. NO.30073/2019:

BETWEEN:

AND:

274

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA; SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING AND PROHIBITION, SPECIAL COURT, KANDAYA BHAVAN AT BENGALURU IN CASE NO.LGC(S) NO.170/2017 PENDING IN COURT VIDE ANNEXURE-B.

IN W.P. NO.30187/2019:

BETWEEN:

K.K.CHANNAKESHAVA S/O SRI KALASAPPA NAIK AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O KOCHUVALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI SHRINGERI TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 139.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRADEEP NAIK K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

275

REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU IN LGC(G) NO.535/2018 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 5 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (ANNEXURE-B).

IN W.P. NO.31106/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI A.H. SUNDARESH S/O HALA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/A SHEDGAR KULLUNDE VILLAGE MANDAGADDE HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 220.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR B.N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

276

VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT DECLARING THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONERS CASE IN LGC(G) NO.2290/2017 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, COURT HALL NO.1 BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS VIDE ANNEXURE-B THEREUNDER.

IN W.P. NO.31107/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI HARIYAPPA NAIKA S/O KRISHNA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/A BAVIGADDE KULLUNDE VILLAGE MANDAGADDE HOBLI

277

THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 220.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR B.N. ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT DECLARING THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONERS CASE IN LGC(G) NO.2291/2017 ANNEXURE-B BEFORE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, COURT HALL NO.1 BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS VIDE ANNEXURE-B. THERE UNDER.

278

IN W.P. NO.31322/2019:

BETWEEN:

SMT.B.C.DHARMA D/O LATE CHINNAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT PETEMUTTA, BHOGARAKOPPA GRAMA KASABA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI (T) SHIVAMOGGA-577 418.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARISH KUMAR M.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDING PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU (COURT NO.2) IN PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(G)NO.1153/2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

279

IN W.P. NO.31349/2019:

BETWEEN:

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KOGARAVALLI VILLAGE KABBINAGADDE DAKHLE HALEBELURU POST SAKALESHAPURA TALUK HASSAN-573 127.

...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

280

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONERS CASE NO.LGC(T) NO.1373/2018 BEFORE THE SPECIAL COURT BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-E).

IN W.P. NO.31350/2019:

BETWEEN:

281

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KOGARAVALLI VILLAGE KABBINAGADDE DAKHLE HALEBELURU POST SAKALESHAPURA TALUK HASSAN-573 127.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

282

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4; SRI A.NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE R5 TO R7)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PETITIONERS’CAS IN CASE NO.LGC(T) NO.1374/2108 BEFORE THE SPECIAL COURT BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-F).

IN W.P. NO.32184/2019:

BETWEEN:

SMT. SHARADAMMA W/O LATE DAYANADA A.N. AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT UMAPATHI TEMPLE ROAD JAYANAGAR, SALAGERI, HOSANAGAR (T) SHIVAMOGGA-577 418.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. HARISH KUMAR M.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

283

BENGALURU-560 001.

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU (COURT NO.2) IN PROCEEDINGS NO.LGC(G) NO.1575/2018 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

IN W.P. NO.33249/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI ASHWATHANARAYANA S/O LATE KEMPAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1836, 5TH MAIN, RPC LAYOUT, VIJAYANGAR BENGALURU-560 040.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

284

BENGALURU-560 001.

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1; SRI B.S.NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ENTIRE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT IN PROCEEDINGS NO.LGC(P) NO.437/2018 AS PER ANNEXURE-C AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER, AS DEEMED AND APPROPRAITE .

IN W.P. NO.33262/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI PAPU GOWDA S/O RUDRAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT BATTEMALLAPPA ALAGERE MANDRI VILLAGE HARIDRAVATHI (POST) HOSANAGAR (T) SHIVAMOGGA-577 418.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. ADVOCATE)

AND:

285

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP FOR R1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU (COURT NO.2) IN PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

IN W.P. NO.34572/2019:

BETWEEN:

MR. RAGHAVENDRA S/O MR. SURENDRA HEGDE AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT KOCHUVALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, SHRINGERI TALUK CHIKKAMANGALUR-577 193.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

286

REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT.KAVITHA H.C., HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SECTION 4(3) OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING (PROBIHIBTION) ACT 2011 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 20.6.2019 PASSED BY KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING, SPECIAL COURT IN LGC(G) NO.622/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.35277/2019:

BETWEEN:

SMT. PRIYADARSHINI W/O SRI M.KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2938/B, SERVICE ROAD, II STAGE VIJAYANAGAR, BENGAURU-560 040.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

287

M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT IN LGC(G) NO.62/2017 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AND CHAPTER 14A OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT 1964 (ANNEXURE-B).

IN W.P. NO.35575/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. K.C. MAHESHA S/O CHINNAIAH HEGADE AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/OF KOCHAVALLI VILLAGE TEKKU POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 139. ...PETITIONER

288

(BY SRI. V.D. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . RANGE FOREST OFFICER

SRIGERI SUB DIVISION

SRINGERI

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KANATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES TO ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-)

IN W.P. NO.35579/2019:

BETWEEN:

MUNEER SAB AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O TAJU SAB R/O HAYA VILLAGE SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 429. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHIDHAMBARA G.S, ADVOCATE)

289

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST

M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR

BEEDI, BENGALURU - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

ANVATTI RANGE

ANAVATTI, SORABA TALUK

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 413. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND DECLARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO LAND GRABBING ON THE PART OF THE PETITIONERS IN RESPECT OF LAND IN QUESTION IN RESPECT OF 1 ACRE 28 GUNTAS OF LAND IN SY. NO.18 OF HAYA VILLAGE, SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

IN W.P. NO.36127/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI FRANCIS GEORGE S/O SRI. C.M. VAKRI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/O JOYE ESTATE HENGAVALLI VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TLAUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 201. ...PETITIONER

290

(BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETRY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER

UDUPI DISTRICT, RAJATHADRI

MANIPAL, UDUPI

DISTRICT - 576 104.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

KUNDAPURA TALUK

UDUPI DISTRICT - 577 201.

4 . THE TAHASILDAR

KUNDAPURA TALUK

UDUPI DISTRICT - 577 201.

5 . STATION HOUSE OFFICER

SHANKARANARAYANA POLICE

STATION, KUNDAPUR CIRCLE

UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 282. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR NO.1 TO 5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INIDA (ANNEXURE-G).

IN W.P. NO.38110/2019:

BETWEEN:

291

SURESH GOWDA S/O SUBBE GOWDA BASANI VILLAGE, MATHIKATTE POST, MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DIST - 577 132.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR N.R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

MUDIGERE RANGE

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 132.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA-VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A).

IN W.P. NO.38701/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI T KRISHNA S/O ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/A THRUPALYA VILLAGE JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL

292

TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 106. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAHUL S REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE TAHSILDHAR

ANEKAL TALUK

ANEKAL, BENGALURU - 562 106.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE SOUTH DIVISION

BANGALORE.

4 . THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT

BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT DECLARING THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14,20, 21 & 300-A.

IN W.P. NO.38895/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. MUNITHIRUMALLALPPA

293

S/O LATE YARRAPPA RESIDING AT NO.43/1 HOSAPALYA, HONGASANDRA VILLAGE, BOMMANAHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 068. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T. SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

4 . THE TASHIDLAR

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

KANDAYA BHAVAN BUILDING

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

5 . THE REGISTRAR

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COURT

FOR KARNATAKA LAND

GRABBING PROHIBITION

K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

294

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.07.2019 ONE PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU (CH-2) IN CASE FOUND AT ANNEXURE-X TO THE WRIT PETITION.

IN W.P. NO.40447/2019:

BETWEEN:

BOMMANAHALLI RAVI S/O. LAKSHMANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT MAJIRE SIRINAYAKANAKOPPA NEGAVADI VILLAGE KUPPAGADDE HOBLI SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. KALYAN KUMAR H.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . RANGE FOREST OFFICER

ANAVATTI RANGE

SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA

DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

295

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.08.2019 IN NO. LGC (G) NO.715/2018 FROM THE COURT OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AT ANNX-D.

IN W.P. NO.40448/2019:

BETWEEN:

EERAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT MAJIRE SIRINAYAKANAKOPPA NEGAVADI VILLAGE, KUPPAGADDE HOBLI SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. KALYAN KUMAR H.S, ADVOCATE)

AND 1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . RANGE FOREST OFFICER

ANAVATTI RANGE

SORABA TALUK

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

296

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.08.2019 IN CASE NO. LGC (G) NO.718/2018 FROM THE COURT OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT ART BENGALURU AT ANNX-D.

IN W.P. NO.40450/2019:

BETWEEN:

RAMAPPA GODNAR S/O.BASAVANAYAPAP RESIDING AT MAJIRE SIRINAYAKANAKOPPA NEGAVADI VILALGE KUPPAGADDE HOBLI SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. KALYAN KUMAR H.S, ADVOCATE)

AND: 1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRERARY

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . RANGE FOREST OFFICER

ANAVATTI RANGE

SORABA TALUK

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

297

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.08.2019 IN CASE NO. LGC (G) NO.720/2018 BY THE COURT OF KARNATAKA LNAD GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AT ANNEXURE-D.

IN W.P. NO.41715/2019:

BETWEEN:

MR. D.B. KRISHNEGOWDA S/O BASAVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT DEVEGOWDANAKOPPALU VILALGE, HULIKERE POST NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SIDHARTH B. MUCHANDI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING

PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT

III FLOOR KANDAYA BHAVAN

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009

REPRESENTED BY IS REGISTRAR.

2 . TAHSILDHAR

NAGAMANGALA TALUK

MANDYA DISTRICT - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP,

298

R-1 IS DELETED VIDER ORDER DATED 25.10.2019)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (G) 1113/2017 BY KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.41716/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . MRS K.T. KAMAKSHAMMA

W/O D V KRISHNEGOWDA

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

2 . MR D B KRISHNEGOWDA

S/O BASAVEGOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

R/AT DEVEGOWDANAKOPPALU

VILLAGE, HULIKERE POST

KASABA HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA

TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SIDHARTH B. MUCHANDI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

TAHSILDHAR NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 577 101. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

299

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.42273/2019:

BETWEEN:

SMT. SEETHAVVA W/O T N SOMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O KONGANA VILLAGE VIRAJPET TALUK SOUTH KODAGU. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. RANJAN KUMAR K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE TAHSILDAR

VIRAJPET TALUK

MADIKERI - 571 218.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

KODAGU DISTRICT

MADIKERI - 571 201.

3 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

101, 1ST FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA

DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

300

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19, ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIAL (ANNX-A).

IN W.P. NO.45583/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. K.R. CHANDRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O. RAME GOWDA R/AT KEMMANNU GADDE DEVAGODU VILLAGE MEGUNDA HOBLI, KOPPA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR - 577 112. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY

THE UNDER SECRETARY TO

GOVERNMENT, REVENUE

DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE TAHSILDAR

KOPPA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU

DISTRICT - 577 126

NOS.1 AND 2 ARE REPRESENTED

BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS

301

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19, ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIAL (ANNX-A).

IN W.P. NO.50244/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . ADARSH DEVELOPERS

A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM

NO.10, VITTAL MALLAYA ROAD,

BENGALURU-560 001,

REPRESENTED BY ITS

MANAGING PARTNER

B.M. JAYESHANKAR

S/O LATE B. M. MADAIAH

AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.

2 . B.M. JAYESHANKAR

S/O LATE B.M. MADAIAH

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

OFFICE AT NO. 10

VITTAL MALLYA ROAD

BENGALURU - 560 001.

3 . B.M. KARUNESH

S/O LATE B. MADIAH

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

OFFICE AT NO. 10, VITTAL

MALLYA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. K. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR. COUNSEL FOR

302

SMT. LATHA S SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S. BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . CAPTAIN RAJESH PATRO

S/O. DEVENDRA PATRO,

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

R/AT F-004, TOWER-4,

ADARSH PALM RETREAT

CONDOMINIUMS

BANGALORE - 560 103.

3 . ASHWIN KULASHEKAR

S/O KULASEKHAR KARKARLA

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

C-301, TOWER NO.4

ADARSH PALM RETREAT

CONDOMINIUMS

BANGALORE - 560 103.

4 . R. MURALIDHARA REDDY

S/O. LATE V RANGA REDDY

AGED ABOUT 53 EYARS

RESIDING AT LOTUS-303

TOWER 6, ADARSH PALM

RETREAT CONDOMINIUMS

BANGALORE - 560 103.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1; SMT. S. PADMINI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

303

PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 AND 300-A OF TH ECONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A)

IN W.P. NO.50781/2019:

BETWEEN:

S.V. SUBRAMANYA S/O LATE SRI. S.S. VENKATAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT KASKE MANE JANAGADDE POST, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R GOULAY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR

VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKKAMAGALUR - 577 101.

3 . THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKKAMAGALUR 577 101.

4 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

BALEHONNUR RANGE

CHIKKAMAGALUR, CHIKKAMAGALUR

304

DISTRICT - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC (G) NO.1885/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AS PER ANNEXURE-G IN RESPECT OF THE LANDS IN QUESTION, AS WITHOUT COMPETENCE AND JURISDICTION AND OTHERWISE BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID.

IN W.P. NO.50828/2019:

BETWEEN:

K.T. THIPPERUDRAPPA S/O K THIPPESWAMI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT NO.251, K K PURA ROAD RAMPURA, MOLAKALMUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 540. ...PETITIONER

(BY SMT. RAKSHITHA V.N, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K. RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

M.S. BUILDING,

BENGALURU - 560 001.

REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

305

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA - 577 701.

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA SUB-DIVISION

CHITRADURGA - 577 701.

4 . THE TAHSILDAR

MOLAKALMUR, CHITRADURGA

DISTRICT - 577 701. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT KARNATAKA ACT NO.38 OF 2014 IS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, THE SUBSTANTIAL PROVISIONS BEING VIOLATIVE FO ARTICLE 14 ARTICLE 20, ARTICLE 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A FO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.50955/2019:

BETWEEN:

1 . RAJAPPA

S/O KEREYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

OCC-AGRICULTURE

NAADAMANCHALE VILLAGE

SAGARA TALUK

SHIMOGA - 577 423.

2 . GOVINDAPPA

S/OKEREYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

OCC- AGRICULTURE

NAADAMANCHALE VILLAGE

SAGARA TALUK

SHIMOGA - 577 423.

306

3 . GOPALA

S/O VENKATA

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS

OCC-AGRICULTURE

KANUTHOTA VILLAGE

EDUVAANI POST

SAGARA TALUK

SHIMOGA - 577 421. ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR G.S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS

CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

M.S.BUILDING,

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

SHIMGOA, SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 101.

3 . THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

SAGAR RANGE, SHIMOGGA

DISTRICT - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.50956/2019:

307

BETWEEN:

AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

AMBLIGOLA

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 426.

…..RESPONDENTS

308

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.51043/2019:

BETWEEN:

309

PUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE, DYAVANAHALLI POST, SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA -577 419.

(BY SRI. MAHAVEER. K. JAIN, ADVOCATE)

AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECREARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

310

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.51101/2019:

BETWEEN:

SMT. MEENA POOJARTHI W/O RAVI SHETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT DEMAND REGISTER NO.686/419 SIDDESHWAR LAYOUT SURLIBALEBAILU VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI THIRTHAHALLI TQ. SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 448.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA K R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

311

AND RANGE FOREST OFFICER THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 422.

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(G) No.22 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING SPECIAL COURT, BENGALURU A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-L1 FIR IN No.TTH FOC 54/2016-17 BEFORE ENQUIRY OFFICER AND RANGE FOREST OFFICER, THIRTHAHALLI , COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H AND FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REGULARIZE THE HOUSE PROPERTY BEARING DEMAND REGISTER No.686 /419 OR SIDDESHWAR LAYOUT, SURULIBALEBAILU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

IN W.P. NO.51638/2019:

BETWEEN:

ANAND S/O MANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, BANAKAL VILLAGE AND POST, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT – 577 132. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR N R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

312

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A)

IN W.P. NO.51710/2019:

BETWEEN:

313

SANTHEHALLI VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 130.

AND:

314

MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 130.

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.51830/2019:

BETWEEN:

MR. IRFAN RAZACK AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS SON OF LATE MR. S RAZACK HAVING OFFICE AT THE FALCON HOUSE NO.1, MAIN GUARD CROSS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. UDAY HOLLA, SR.CL., FOR SRI. M.B. ANIRUDH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

315

….RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 ANNEXURE-D AND THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS, 2017 ANNEXURE-E ARE ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND CONSEQUENTLY STRIKE DOWN THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AND THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION (SPECIAL COURT) REGULATIONS, 2017.

IN W.P. NO.51878/2019:

BETWEEN:

316

S/O SRI MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR BHAT A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

ALL ARE RESIDING AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI,

317

HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSKOTE - 562 114, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1& R-2 SRI. B M HALASWAMY FOR R-3 TO R-7))

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER IN CASE No.LGC(P) No.297/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B DATED 18.10.2019 FROM THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME.

IN W.P. NO.51879/2019:

BETWEEN:

SMT. M MAMATHA W/O NARAYANASWAMY M AGED ABOUR 45 YEARS, R/AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR BHAT A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

318

REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

ALL ARE RESIDING AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSKOTE - 562 114, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. ….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1& R-2 SRI. B M HALASWAMY FOR R-3 TO R-7))

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER IN CASE No.LGC(P) No.297/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B DATED 18.10.2019 FROM THE FILE

319

OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME.

IN W.P. NO.51926/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. YALIYAPPA S/O. NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK,

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR BHAT.A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

320

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER IN CASE No.LGC(P) No.297/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B DATED 18.10.2019 FROM THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME.

IN W.P. NO.51941/2019:

BETWEEN:

G BASAVARAJA S/O G GANGAREDDY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT KEREKONDAPURA VILLAGE RAMPURA POST MOLAKALMUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 540. ...PETITIONER (BY SMT. RAKSHITHA V N, FOR

321

SRI. RAGHAVENDRA RAO K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT KARNATAKA ACT No.38 OF 2014 IS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, THE SUBSTANTIAL PROVISIONS BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.51944/2019:

BETWEEN:

T M VIRUPAKSHAIAH S/O T.M.SIDDARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NEAR OMKARASWAMY MATHA, KUBER NAGAR, KK.PURA ROAD,

322

RAMPURA, MOLAKALMUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 540. ...PETITIONER (BY SMT. RAKSHITHA V N, FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA RAO K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT KARNATAKA ACT No.38 OF 2014 IS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, THE SUBSTANTIAL PROVISIONS BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.51945/2019:

BETWEEN:

323

H KUMARASWAMY S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/A KUBER NAGAR K K PURA ROAD, RAMPURA MOLAKALMUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT – 577 540.

...PETITIONER (BY SMT. RAKSHITHA V N FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA RAO K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT KARNATAKA ACT NO.38 OF 2014 IS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, THE SUBSTANTIAL PROVISIONS BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND ARTICLE 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

324

IN W.P. NO.51961/2019:

BETWEEN:

325

MULABAGAL TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT – 963 125.

(BY SRI. NARAYANA SWAMY P M, ADVOCATE)

AND:

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

326

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. P B RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38 OF 2014) AS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 20, 21 AND 300-A AND OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE.

IN W.P. NO.52011/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI K SHANKRAPPA S/O. KEMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR BHAT A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

327

S/O. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

ALL ARE RESIDING AT APPASANDRA VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSKOTE - 562 114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 AND R-2; SRI. B.M. HALASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 TO R-7)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER IN CASE NO.LGC(P) No.297/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B FROM THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT AT BENGALURU AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME.

IN W.P. NO.52032/2019:

BETWEEN:

SRI. KESHAVAMURTHY G.B

328

S/O BADRAIAH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT HEBBARIGE VILLAGE AND POST, SAGARA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 401. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PATIL DAYANAND SUBRAYAGOUDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S. BUILDING

BANGALORE - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2 . TAHASILDAR

SAGARA TALUK

SAGARA SHIVAMOGGA

DISTRICT - 577 401. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRES ARTICLE 14, ARTICLE 19, ARTICLE 21 AND ARITCLE 300-1 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

IN W.P. NO.52134/2019:

BETWEEN:

M/S FERNS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS RAINBOW DRIVE LAYOUT, SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU – 560 035 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/PARTNER .

329

SRI AUSTIN ROACH S/O LATE MR. P A ROACH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS “TIARA”, FIRST FLOOR, RESIDING AT 682, BINNAMANGALA 1ST STAGE, 9TH A MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 038. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. SAMMITH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S SHIVANANDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 (KARNATAKA ACT 38/2014) IS ULTRA VIRUS THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14, 20, 21, AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AS CONTAINED IN ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.52566/2019:

330

BETWEEN:

AND:

331

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION AND TO DECLARE THE PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS TO ARTICLES 14, 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.52609/2019:

BETWEEN:

332

S/O SUSHINDRA NARAYANA DAS AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS U203, TOWER 5 ADARSH PALM RETREAT CONDOMINIUMS PHASE 3, DEVERABISANAHALLI BELLANDUR, BENGALURU – 560 103.

333

B-204, TOWER 6 ADARSH PALM RETREAT CONDOMINIUMS PHASE 3, DEVARABISANAHALLI BELLANDUR, BENGALURU – 560 103.

334

PHASE 3, DEVARABISANAHALLI BELLANDUR, BENGALURU – 560 103.

AND:

335

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS ARTICLE 14, 19, 20, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA UNDER ANNEXURE-A.

IN W.P. NO.220/2020:

336

BETWEEN:

SUNDAR PUJARI S/O. BABU PUJARI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS NAYINADY, MALNAD GRAMA, NEMMARU POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 139. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAGADEESH M L, ADVOCATE)

AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 AND R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ULTRA VIRUS TO ARTICLE 14, 19, 21 AND 300-A OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

IN W.P. NO.3190/2020:

BETWEEN

K.M. SHIVALINGE GOWDA

337

S/O MANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, ARSIKERE CONSTITUENCY RESIDING AT MARUTINAGAR ARASIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. HASHMATH PASHA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. NASIR ALI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF URBAN

DEVELOPMENT AND TOWN

PLANNING, REPRESENTED

BY ITS SECRETARY

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE - 560 001.

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

HASSAN DISTRICT

HASSAN - 573 201.

3 . COMMISSIONER

TOWN MUNICIPALITY

ARASIKERE, HASSAN

DISTRICT - 573 103.

THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3

ARE REPRESENTED BY THE

LEARNED GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BENGALURU.

4 . SRI. H.G. VEERABHADRAPPA

S/O GANGADHARAPPA

AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS

RESIDING AT HOSEKARAHALLI

338

VILLGE, MADULU POST

KANAKATTE HOBLI, ARSIKERE

TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 211.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND

SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. VIJAYAKRISHNA BHAT M, ADVOCATE R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED IN CASE NO.L.G.C (P) NO.86/2018 ON THE FILE OF TH ESPECIAL COURT UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW IN ANNEXURE-B.

IN W.P.NO.9647/2020

BETWEEN:

MR. H.T. BYREGOWDA S/O LATE THAMMANNA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/AT YELAGUDIGE VILLAGE, ALDUR POST, CHIKKAMAGALUR - 577 111.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA PRASAD M S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

339

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN LGC(G) No.75 OF 2018 IN KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT, KANDAYA BHAVANA, BANGALORE ( THE SPECIAL COURT) VIDE ANNESURE-F, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND AWARD COSTS OF THE PETITION.

IN W.P.NO.12647/2020

BETWEEN:

THE KARNATAKA INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT, 1ST FLOOR C R BUILDING ANNEXE, QUEEN'S ROAD BENGALURU -560 001, KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR K E RAJAN. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K R KRISHNAMOORTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

340

BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PRABHULING K NAVADAGI, AG A/W SRI. V SREENIDHI, AGA AND SMT. KAVITHA HC, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE IMPUGNED ACT KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT, 2011 (AT ANNEXURE-A) AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND ULTRA VIRUS THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLES 14, 19, 20, 21 AND 300-A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

THESE PETITIONS BEING HEARD AND RESERVED, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

341

O R D E R

In these batch of writ petitions, the constitutional validity of Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011, which has come into force with effect from 20.10.2014 by Karnataka 38/2014 (for short 'KLGP Act-2011') has been challenged.

ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONERS

342

Sriyuths S. Ajesh kumar, J.M. Rajanna Setty, D.R.Ravishankar. B.Amarnath, M.R.Rajagopal, Sunil Rao for T.Sheshagiri Rao, Siddharth.B.Muchandi, Prakash.T.Hebbar, B.R.Krishna, Sreeshail Navalgund, R Bhadrinath. S.G.Bhagavan, Narayana Swamy P.M., Harish H.V., Kumar J.C., M.Shivaparaksh, Ajith P.B., B.S.Radhanandan, Suresh Desai.K., Badri Vishal, H.Srinivas Rao, Ganapathy Bhat Vajralli, Dhananjay Kumar, V.Vishwanath Shetty, Sahul Hameed, N.Ravindranath Kamath, B.V.Mallareddy, C.M.Poonacha, Ajith Kalyan, N.Shankara Narayana Bhat, P.N.Manmohan, V.Vinod Reddy, K.G.Shivanna, Chandrakanth R.Goulay, S.Sudarsan, Shanmukhappa, A.Keshava Bhat, Rajendra Kumar Sungai, Rahul S.Reddy, D.R.Ravishankar for N.Shivakumar, S.Shaker Shetty, R.Badrinath, B.S.Sachin, T.N.Raghupathy, Rameshchandra, D.Hemanth Kumar, Nayanatara for G.L.Vishwanath, V.B.Siddaramaiah, D.C.Srinivasa, K.Jeevan,

343

G.R.Mohan, V.Sanjay Krishna, S.Basavaraj, A.Abhinav Ramanand, Akki Manjunatha Gowda, Y.T.Abhinay a/w Byregowda, M.V.Hiremath, Pundikai Ishwar Bhat, K.Chandan, P.H.Virupakashaiah, K.Ranajan Kumar, Venugopal M.S., Aruna Shyam M., a/w Suyog, S.V.Prakash, P.B.Appaiah, K.Srihari, Sammit.S. for S.Shivananda, N.V.Srikanth, Naveed Ahmed, Vigneshwar S.Shsastri, V.R.Prasanna, C.R.Gopalaswamy, H.R.Anantha Krishna Murthy, S.K.Acharya, Sampat Bapat, K.N.Puttegowda, P.M.Siddamallappa, Sharath S.Gowda, K.R.Srinivasa Patavardhan, T.A.Karumbiah, Lokesh .S.G., B.K.Chandrashekar, Nitish for K.V.Narasimhan, D.J.Rakshitha, C.M.Nagabhushana, A.R.Goutham, C.R.Subramanya, B.S.Prasad, V.N.Rakshitha & V.Vidya for K.Raghavendra Rao, C.Parameshwarappa, H.C.Shivaramu for B.Keshavamurthy, G.S.Chidambara, Pruthvi Wodeyar, H.S.Prashanth, Harsha.D.Joshi, V.Srenivas, S.Rajendra, H.S.Prashanth,

344

H.S.Dwarakanath, A.Madhusudhana Rao, Kaleemullah Sheriff, A.G.Shivanna, Sreepada H.R. and B.R.Prasanna, Lohitaswa Banakar, M.D.Basavanna, G.Harish, B.Keshava Murthy and G.R.Prasanna, K.R.Ramesh, Yathish.J.Nadiga, B.S.Jeevan Kumar, K.J.Bhojanna, N.Sukumar Jain, S.V.Shastri, Halesha.R.G, Ravikumar.N.R., B.H.Shamanna, K.R.Bharadwaj, K.Pradeep Naik, B.N.Sunil Kumar, M.S. Harish Kumar, Nagiah, S.Rajashekar, V.D.Raviraj, H.S.Kalyan Kumar, P.P.Hegde, G.S.Praveen Kumar, Mahaveer.K.Jain a/w Nandish Patil, K.R.Rajendra, George Joseph for Dua Assts, A.Vijay Kumar Bhat, Patil Dayananda Subraya Gouda, B.Ranga Swamy.B., M.L.Jagadeesh, M.S Raghavendra Prasad, K.R.Krishnamurthy, Aditya Kumar H.R., for Dayananda S.Patil, learned Advocates appearing for petitioners.

ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENTS: 3. We have heard Sriyuths Prabhuling K. Navadgi, learned Advocate General a/w V. Sreenidhi,

345

Additional Government Advocate and H.C.Kavitha, HCGP - M.V.Thanuja, Vivek

Yavagal, N.R.Jagadeeswara, Kempanna, B.S.Manjunath, H. Shanthi Bhushan, H. Sridhara, B.R.Satish, N.Subba Shastry, Pradeep J.S., D.Mallikarjuna Swamy, K. Hanumantharayappa, Manu Kulkarni A/W. Srushti Widge for Poovayya & CO., Chokka Reddy, Vivek Holla, Chethan Kumar, J. Anil Kumar, B.R.Viswanath, Punith, B.S. Anil Kumar, M.S.Parthasarathi, R.S.Prasanna

Kumar, B.S.Basavaraju, K. Suresh Desai, P. Mahadevaswamy and S. Krishnamurthy, K.M. Somashekar, H. Jayakar Shetty, Ashwin S. Halady, K.B.S.Manian, R.Kothwal, L.Sreekanta Rao & B.S.Krishna, Rajesh Shetty, V. Raghunath, C.R. Krishnappa, P. Srinath, A.V. Gangadharappa, Ravi Shankar. S., T.P.Mali Patil, R. Ramachandran, S.N. Prashanth Chandra, Showri H.R., Jayaprakash, N.R. Jagadeeswara, Sandesh A.S., Ashwini B.N., I.G.Gachchinamath, M. Aswathnarayana Reddy, Chennamma, K.N.Putte

346

Gowda, K. Sheela Anish, Gowthamdev C Ullal, K.A. Prakash, S.N. Bhat, R.B.Sadasivappa, K. Sheelavathi, R.P. Somashekaraiah, Tejaswini S. & Praveen Kumar N.K., M.C. Nagashree, B.N. Puttalingaiah, S. Chandrashekaraiah, N.V.Prakash and B.V. Sudhindra, Bipin Hegde, T.R. Ananda party-in- person, S. Nagaraja, Hanumanthappa B. Haravigoudar, A. Nagarajappa, B.S. Nagaraja, R. Madhusudan Reddy, S. Padmini and Vijaya Raghavan, B.M.Halaswamy, P.B. Raju, M. Vijayakrishna Bhat, learned Advocates appearing for respondents. Sri. Chandrashekar.V, party-in-person.

CONTENTIONS RAISED BY LEARNED ADVOCATES APPEARING FOR THE PETITIONERS:

347

4.1 It is contended that the offence created under the Act namely, Section 3 declares land grabbing or any activity connected with or arising out of land grabbing unlawful; Section 4(1) prohibits land grabbing; section 4(2) holds a person who "on or after the commencement of this Act continues to be in occupation of the grabbed land"; and Section 5 criminalises offences in connection with land grabbing. It is contended that land grabbing as defined under section 2(f) consists of several activities and it is committed once for all and therefore, it is not a continuing offence. It is further contended that the activities relating to land grabbing are illegally taking possession, entering into and creating tenancies, leases, licences, constructing unauthorised structures for sale or hire, giving grabbed land to any person for rent, lease, licence, for construction, use, occupation of unauthorised structures. It is contended that land grabber is one who commits or committed the offence land grabbing

348

prior to Act and Section 9(1) and Section 2(e) makes the offence under Section 4(1) retrospective operation and Article 21 of the Constitution of India prohibits any person to be convicted of any offence if the same is not in violation of a law which was not in force at the time of commission of the offence. Hence, it is contended that Sections 2(e), 3, 4(1) and 9(1) operate retrospectively and not being continuing offences, it is in clear violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is also contended that Section 5 ought to be construed as operating prospectively, whereas, Section 9(1) empowers the Special Court to take cognizance of all offences under the Act whether or before the commencement of the Act, thereby making Section 5 retrospective in operation which violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

4.2 It is also contended that the Hon'ble Apex Court in SHREYA SINGHAL vs UNION OF INDIA reported in (2015)5 SCC 1 has held that a section which creates an offence and which is vague must be

349

struck down as arbitrary and unreasonable. Applying the said principle, petitioners are contending that Section 3 does not define or indicate the activities connected with or arising out of land grabbing and Section 3 being in precise, for sheer vagueness, it is to be struck down.

4.3 It is also contended that the Special procedure contemplated under the Act lays down substantially different procedure for trial of offences than that is laid down in general law namely, Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') and on account of said departure, Section 9 is liable to be struck down as it violates Article 14. It is contended that right of revision provide under Section 397 Cr.P.C. and right of appeal provide under Section 374 Cr.P.C. is taken away by virtue of Section 9(3) as the orders of the Special Court are final. Hence, it is contended that right of appeal in a criminal case being a fundamental right, same cannot be taken away.

350

4.4 Further contention with regard to procedure as prescribed under Section 9 of KLGP Act-2011 is attacked on the ground that same provides for summary trial and under Section 262 of Cr.P.C., no sentence of imprisonment exceeding three months shall be passed in case of conviction under Chapter XX of Cr.P.C. Whereas, Section 10 of the KLGP Act-2011 prescribes that Cr.P.C. will apply to act so long as it is not inconsistent with the Act. Hence, it is contended that on account of KLGP Act- 2011 provides for only summary trial, the Act prevails over the Code. It is contended that for offences under the KLGP Act, it ought to be tried as warrant case as otherwise, the accused would be deprived of procedure for discharge; liberty to summon witnesses in support of defence is curtailed; and compensation for accusation without a reasonable cause as prescribed under Section 250 Cr.P.C. would be lost.

351

4.5 It is also contended that the procedure prescribed under the KLGP Act-2011 is manifestly arbitrary as Section 9(5)(b) of the Act provides that offences would be tried summarily and procedure for criminal trial is not set out. It is also contended that complex question of title cannot be tried summarily and therefore, Act is manifestly arbitrary.

4.6 By referring to Section 9(4) it is contended that civil and criminal proceedings in respect of same facts and between same person will be heard in the same forum and Special Court having unguided discretion to determine the order in which civil and criminal liability will be decided and as such, it is liable to be struck down.

4.7 It is further contended that Section 9(1) of the KLGP Act-2011 empowers the Special Court to take cognizance even when a private person initiates the same and this unguided discretion is manifestly arbitrary. It is contended that innocent persons would be roped in and definition prescribed under

352

Section 2(e) criminalises actions of successors in interest of grabbed land and such innocent persons lacking requisite mens rea and they can only be held responsible for civil consequences flowing from such acts and they cannot be held criminally liable.

4.8 Learned Advocates have drawn the attention of the Court to Section 11 of the Act to contend that reverse onus clause has been passed namely, evidentiary burden on the accused to establish that he/she is not guilty of the offence of land grabbing. It is contended that reverse onus clause as it stands applies only to class of offenders under the Act, inasmuch as, Section 11 only prescribes its application to land owned by the Government by excluding the land belonging to other authorities as prescribed under Section 2(d)(i). It is also contended that reverse onus clause under the Act violates the right of the accused who is presumed to be innocent. It is contended that the reverse onus clause as formulated in SHAIKH ZAHID MUKHTAR vs

353

STATE AND OTHERS reported in (2017)2 ABR 40 prescribes four fold tests to determine the constitutional validity of a reverse onus clause and the Act does not satisfy the said four fold tests and as such, it is to be struck down as violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

4.9 Further submission relates to wrongful exclusion of mens rea. It is contended that a crime is said to be committed only when criminalized actus reus is accompanied by mens rea. Contending that members of the general public are not directly affected by the offence of land grabbing and as such, it cannot be construed as having deleterious consequences on public welfare. Hence, contending that exclusion of mens rea affects liberty of the accused guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

4.10 It is also contended that Section 16 violates the doctrine of separation of powers, by usurping judicial function and the well settled law

354

that legislation can be invalidated on the ground that it violates the basic structure of the constitution.

4.11 It is further contended that land grabbing does not fall under Article 323B(2) of the Constitution of India and as such, for lack of legislative competence to constitute Special Court, the KLGP Act-2011 is liable to be struck down. It is also contended that there is no classification found and nexus between object of the Act to be achieved and there is no intelligible differentia. It is contended that impugned Act makes certain class of persons a distinct class and affords them with inordinate protection, whilst cleaning out protection to private person and therefore there is unjust classification making ordinary private title suits amenable to the jurisdiction of civil courts.

4.12 Referring to Section 9 as being manifestly error and contending that State has abdicated its power to make an application to Special Court being

355

delegated to any person or suo motu without any limitations is liable to be struck down.

4.13 It is also contended that there is no statutory responsibility to pass a reasoned prima- facie order before taking cognizance which affects the right of a party and Section 20 also does not deal with order of transfer requiring reasoned order. Elaborating on the sequencing of procedure as arbitrary and discriminatory, it is contended that Section 9(4) allows for sequencing at the whims and fancies of the Chairman of the Special Court and as such, said provision is liable to be struck down.

4.14 It is argued that Section 7(10) provides a blanket protection even if there is defect in the constitution of the Special Court and Section 7(9) does not compulsorily state that a quorum to be valid, there should be presence of one Judicial member and one Revenue member and therefore, between Section 7(8) and 7(9) there is inherent contradiction.

356

4.15 Right to fair trial being an important facet of Article 21 and resting their oars on this Article, it is contended that Section 8 of the impugned Act authorises an officer to initiate legal action without defining legal action and therefore, on the basis of purely subjective opinion of the officer, Special Court may take cognizance without regard to due process being followed by the officer. Expressing that there may be unconscious bias on the part of the Chairman on account of discretion granted to him under Section 9(4), 9(5) and 8(c) and (d), petitioners are seeking for said provisions being struck down as violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

4.16 It is also contended that Section 9 of the Act by virtue of Doctrine of Reference has virtually incorporated the offence envisaged under Section 192-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short KLR Act) and Section 9 cannot have overriding effect vis- a-vis Section 192-A.

357

4.17 It is the submission of petitioners that Section 9(4) of the Act is inconsistent with Sections 40 and 43 of the Indian Evidence Act and same has been engrafted in total violation of standard of proofs required in a civil and criminal trial.

4.18 It is also contended by the learned Advocates appearing for the petitioners in some of the writ petitions are in possession of the lands as morefully described in the petition from long number of years and have filed applications under the KLR Act, Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 seeking regularization and during the pendency of the said applications they cannot be prosecuted for the offence prescribed under the KLGP Act-2011. It is also contended that in some of the cases petitioners have been in continuous and uninterrupted possession of government land beyond 30 years and being in possession of the land would not amount to land grabbing, particularly when the

358

revenue authorities have themselves recognized the possession of petitioners over such lands, it cannot be construed that it is an act of land grabbing.

4.19 It is also contended that in respect of the grants made in favour of the petitioners or their predecessor in title, are being reopened after long number of years when the applicants seek for mutating the revenue records in the changed circumstances like seeking entry on the death of the grantee, holder or owner of the land and in such circumstances the revenue entries which have been in existence from time immemorial is sought to be doubted and under that pretext the proceedings under the KLGP Act-2011 is being initiated by terming the applicants as land grabbers. Hence, the settled issues cannot be unsettled after long number of years and on the ground of impugned Act being onerous, it is liable to be struck down.

4.20 It is also contended that the provisions of the KLGP Act-2011 are inconsistent with the

359

provisions of Limitation Act, 1963 and as such the Act as whole is liable to be struck down as unconstitutional.

4.21 It is contended that the provisions of KLGP Act-2011/2014 is inconsistent with existing laws like Karnataka Land Revenue Act or Karnataka Land Reforms Act or Transfer of Property Act, since Section 2(d) of the impugned enactment is pre-fixed with the name of the title holder Government/Wakf/Hindu religious and religious institutions and charitable endowments, local authorities or other statutory or non-statutory bodies owned or controlled or managed by the Government. Hence, it is contended that prior to commencement of proceedings under the impugned Act, two conditions ought to have been included under the impugned enactment namely, a court or tribunal or authority of competent jurisdiction should have determined that the subject land is owned by such authority and in other words, there should be no determination by a

360

court or tribunal or other authority that subject land is in the ownership of a private party. It is also contended that under Section 4(2) of the impugned Act, the proceedings can be commenced before the Special Court overlooking the limitation and contrary to Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963, where the right to a property gets extinguished if a suit for possession is not instituted within the time stipulated. The attention of the Court is drawn to Article 64, 65 and 111 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 which provide for the period of limitation by which, a suit has to be filed.

4.22 It is further contended that even in case where a final determination either under Section 67 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act or Section 48-A of Karnataka Land Reforms Act or there being a judgment/decree determining title pursuant to proceedings initiated before competent jurisdiction, even then, by virtue of Section 16 of the impugned

361

Act, same can be ignored and this amounts to usurpation of the judicial power.

In support of their submissions, they have relied upon the following judgments: 1. (2010) 11 SCC 1: UNION OF

INDIA Vs. R. GANDHI,

PRESIDENT, MADARAS BAR

ASSOCIATION.

OF KARNATAKA BY ITS

SECRETARY REVENUE

DEPARMENT AND OTHERS

Vs. HOLEYAPPA AND OTHERS.

(2007) 15 SCC 744: STATE OF

KARNATAKA AND OTHERS Vs. I.S.

NIRVANE GOWDA AND OTHERS.

NIRANJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

Vs. CUSTODIAN, EVACUEE

PROPERTY (PB) AND ANOTHER.

(1974) 2 SCC 402: MAGANLAL

CHHAGANLAL (P) LIMITED Vs.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF

GREATER BOMBAY AND OTHERS

AND CONNECTED MATTERS.

(2016) 7 SCC 703: CELLULAR

OPERATORS ASSOCIATION

OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS.

TELECOM REGULATORY

AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND

OTHERS.

362

(1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P.

AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL

& CO. AND OTHERS.

(1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC

78: 22 STC 416 :

DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

(1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT

OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS.

THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO

AND ANOTHER.

10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M.

SANKARANARAYANAN Vs.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

BANGALORE.

11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN

SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA.

12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF

HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL

MUTTAL AND OTHERS.

13.(2008) 5 SCC 662: S.K. ALAGH

Vs. STATE OF UTTAR

PRADESH AND OTHERS.

14.(2008) 17 SCC 285: TAMIL NADU

ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs.

RASIPURAM TEXTILE

PRIVATE LIMITED AND

OTHERS.

15.(2005) 8 SCC 89: S.M.S.

PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. Vs.

NEETA BHALLA AND

ANOTHER.

16.(2011) 1 SCC 176: PEPSICO

INDIA HOLDINGS PRIVATE

363

LIMITED VS. FOOD

INSPECTOR AND ANOTHER.

17.(2014) 16 SCC : POOJA

RAVINDER DEVIDASANI Vs.

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND

ANOTHER.

18.(2018) 2 GAUHATI LAW

REPORTS 313: STATE OF

ASSAM, IN RE.

19.1981 (SUPP) SCC 87: S.P. GUPTA

Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND

ANOTHER AND CONNECTED

MATTERS.

20.(2004) 7 SCC 398: GOUNI SATYA

REDDI Vs. GOVT. OF A.P AND

OTHERS.

21.(2010) 5 SCC 382: STATE OF

ANDHARA PRADESH Vs.

HYDERABAD POTTERIES

PRIVATE LIMITED.

22.W.P. NO. 16633/2004

(D.D.11.03.2005): MOHD.

SIDDIQ ALI KHAN Vs. SHAHSUN

FINANCE LIMITED.

23.1997 SCC ONLINE AP 268: J.V.

SARMA AND OTHERS Vs.

SPECIAL COURT UNDER

A.P. LAND GRABBING

(PROHIBITION) ACT, 1982,

HYD. AND OTHERS.

24.(2011) 3 SCC 351: HARSHENDRA

KUMAR D Vs. REDBATILATA

KOLEY AND OTHERS.

364

25.CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7764 OF

2014 AND SPECIAL LEAVE

PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.

8332-8333 OF 2014

(D.D.07.08.2019):

RAVINDER KAUR GREWAL AND

OTHERS Vs. MANJIT KAUR

AND OTHERS.

26.AIR 2004 SC 456: PEOPLE'S

UNION FOR CIVIL

LIBERTIES AND ANOTHER Vs.

UNION OF INDIA.

27.W.P. (CIVIL) NO.210/2012

(D.D.12.09.2012): NAMIT

SHARMA Vs. UNION OF

INDIA.

28.CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 71 TO 76

OF 1953 (D.D. 29.05.1953) :

K.C. GAJAPATI NARAYAN DEO

AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF

ORISSA.

29.W.P. NOS. 1118/1979 AND

CONNECTED (D.D.13.11.1980) :

AJAY HASIA AND OTHERS Vs.

KHALID MUJIB SEHRAVARDI

AND OTHERS.

30.CRL.A. NOS.446-449/2004 AND

CONNECTED MATTERS (D.D.

08.03.2006) : ZAHIRA

HABIBULLAH SHEIKH AND

ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF

GUJARAJ AND OTHERS.

31.(1998) 2 SCC 1 : MALPE

VISHWANATH ACHARYA AND

OTHERS Vs. STATE OF

MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER.

365

32.(2011) 9 SCC 1 : K.T.

PLANTATION PRIVATE

LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs.

STATE OF KARNATAKA.

33.CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1948/1968

(D.D. 23.11.1968) : M. MANIKLAL

Vs. STATE OF MYSORE.

34.RSA NO.867/2011 (D.D.

29.09.2015): V.

NARAYANASWAMY Vs. CITY

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND

OTHERS.

35.AIR 2001 SC 2472: SHYAM

SUNDAR AND OTHERS Vs. RAM

KUMAR AND ANOTHER.

36.L.G.C. (P) NO.1425/2017 (D.D.

31.01.218) : SRI. VENKATESH M

Vs. SRI. MARANNA S/O

MARAPPA AND OTHERS.

37.ILR 2015 KAR 701: IYNANDA K.

CHINNAPPA AND OTHERS Vs.

BALACHANDA M. THAMMAIAH

AND ANOTHER.

38.CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4534-

4535/1999 AND CONNECTED

(D.D. 2303.2006) : N. SRINIVASA

RAO Vs. SPL. COURT UNDER A.P.

LAND GRABBING (PROHIBITION)

ACT, & OTHERS.

39.W.P.NOS. 107303/2019 AND

CONNECTED MATTERS

(D.D. 25.06.2019) : PUNDLIKA

Vs. THE TAHASILDAR ALIYAL.

366

40.AIR 1952 SC 75 :

THE

STATE OF W.B Vs. ANWAR ALI

SARKAR AND ANOTHER.

41.AIR 1982 SC 1081: GOVT. OF A.P

Vs. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO

AND ANOTHER.

42.AIR 1966 SC 43: NATHULAL Vs.

STATE OF M.P.

43.(2004) 1 SC CASES 597:

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL

EXCISE Vs. ORIENT FABRICS (P)

LTD.

44.(2005) 7 SC CASES 203: STAR

INDIA (P). LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER

OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI &

GOA.

45.AIR 1975 SC 149: MITTHULAL

AND ANOTHER Vs. THE STATE OF

M.P.

46.(2009) 6 SCC 498: SANTOSH

KUMAR SATHISHBHUSHAN

BARIYAR Vs. STATE OF

MAHARASHTRA.

47.(2015) 5 SCC: SHREYA SINGHAL

Vs. UNION OF INDIA.

48.AIR 1978 SC 597:

SMT.

MANEKA GANDHI Vs. UNION OF

INDIA AND ANOTHER.

49.(2007) 6 SCC 528: DILIP S.

DAHANUKAR Vs. KOTAK

MAHINDRA CO. LTD. AND

ANOTHER.

367

50.(1987) 3 SCC 544: MADHAV

AYAWADANRAO HOSKOT Vs.

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

51.(2014) 10 SCC 1: MADRAS BAR

ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF

INDIA AND ANOTHER.

52.AIR 1970 SC 192:

SHRI.

PRITHVI COTTON MILLS LTD, ETC

Vs. BROACH BOROUGH

MUNICIPALITY AND OTHERS.

53.AIR 1957 SC 628 : R.M.D.

CHAMARBAUGWALLA AND

ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

AND ANOTHER.

54.(2017) 9 SCC 1: SHAYARA BANO

Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND

OTHERS.

55.WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) NO. 1047

OF 2019:

HINDUSTAN

CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

LIMITED & ANR. Vs. UNION OF

INDIA & OTHERS.

56.(2001) 4 SCC 262: KULWANT

KAUR AND OTHERS Vs. GURDIAL

SINGH MANN (DEAD) BY LRS.

AND OTHERS.

57.(1998) 7 SUPREME COURT

CASES 66:

NATIONAL

BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION

CORPORATION Vs. S.

RAGHUNATHAN AND OTHERS.

58.(2002) 3 SCC 258: KONDA

LAKSHMANA BAPUJI Vs. GOVT.

OF A.P. AND OTHERS.

368

59.AIR 2014 SC 2407: STATE

OF TAMIL NADU Vs. STATE OF

KERALA AND ANOTHER.

60.(2011) 9 SCC 354: DELHI

AIRTECH SERVICES PRIVATE

LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs.

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND

ANOTHER.

61.(2013) 1 SCC 353: TUKARAM

KANA JOSHI AND OTHERS Vs.

MAHARASHTRA INDUSTRIAL

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

AND OTHERS.

62.(2016) 1 SCC 762: K. NANJAPPA

(DEAD) BY LEGAL Vs. R.A.

HAMEED ALIAS AMEERSAV

(DEAD) BY LEGAL

REPRESENTATIVES AND

ANOTHER.

63.SPECIAL LAND GRABBING CASE

NO. 15 OF 2015: STATE Vs.

SHRIMATI JAMUNA BARUAH

KONWAR.

64.(2002) 3 SCC 258: KONDA

LAKSHMANA BAPUJI Vs. GOVT.

OF A.P. AND OTHERS.

65.(2007) 6 SCC 236: GREATER

BOMBAY COOP. BANK LTD. Vs.

UNITED YARN TEX(P) LTD. AND

OTHERS.

66.W.P. NO. 3969 OF 2007 AND

CONNECTED MATTERS -D.D.

22.09.2008: SMT. LALITHA

SASTRY Vs. STATE OF

KARNATAKA.

369

67.CRIMINAL PETITION NO.

3141/2012- D.D. 21.01.2013:

SRI. RAMU Vs. STATE OF

KARNATAKA.

68.CRIMINAL PETITION NO.

1479/2013- D.D. 12.08.2013:

SMT. T.S. VANI Vs. SRI.

VISHWABRAHMACHAR.

69.REPORTED CASE W.P.NO.

107303/2019 AND CONNECTED

CASES- D.D. 25.06.2019:

PUNDLIKA Vs. THE TAHASILDAR.

BAHADUR SINGH AND ANOTHER

Vs. STATE OF VINDHYA

PRADESH.

71.(1985) 3 SCC 545: OLGA TELLIS

AND OTHERS Vs. BOMBAY

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND

OTHERS.

72.W.P.(CIVIL) NOS. 1074, 1276,

1310 OF 2019: HINDUSTAN

CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

LIMITED AND ORS. Vs. UNION OF

INDIA (UOI) AND ORS.

73.(1998) 5 SCC 749: 1998

SCC(CRI) 1400: PEPSI FOODS

LTD. AND ANOTHER Vs. SPECIAL

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AND

OTHERS.

74.CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6520, 6521-

6537 AND 6538 OF 2003: K.T.

PLANTATION PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA.

370

75.(2015) 3 SCC 695:

JOINT

COLLECTOR RANGA REDDY

DISTRICT AND ANOTHER Vs. D.

NARSING RAO AND OTHERS.

76.W.P.NO. 50704/2019 : SRI.

ARAVINDA KUMAR Vs. THE

STATE OF KARNATAKA.

77.(2002) 8 SCC 182: KAISER-I-

HIND PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER

Vs.NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPN.

(MAHARASHTRA NORTH) LTD.

AND OTHERS.

78.(2009) 5 SCC 342: GRAND

KAKATIYA SHERATION HOTEL

AND TOWERS EMPLOYEES AND

WORKERS UNION Vs. SRINIVASA

RESORTS LIMITED AND OTHERS.

79.(2019) 8 SCC 729: RAVINDER

KAUR GREWAL AND OTHERS Vs.

MANJIT KAUR AND OTHERS.

80.WRIT PETITION NOS. 36354 TO

36357 OF 1999: D.K. ABDUL

KHADER AND ORS. Vs. UNION OF

INDIA AND ORS.

81.CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3067 OF

2004 AND 3717 OF 2005: UNION

OF INDIA (UOI) Vs. R. GANDHI

AND ORS.

82.CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 251

AND 252 OF 2017: RAJIV KUMAR

AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND

ORS.

83.WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 38

OF 1997 AND 21 OF 2004:

SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY AND ORS.

371

Vs. DIRECTOR, CENTRAL

BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND

ORS.

84.(2010) 10 SCC 744:

COMPETITION COMMISSION OF

INDIA Vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF

INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER.

85.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1500 OF

2010:

KISHNAN SINGH (D)

THROUGH LRS. Vs. GURPAL

SINGH AND ORS.

86.WRIT PETITION NO. 6889 OF

1979: BLAZE AND CENTRAL (P.)

LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND

ORS.

87.CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8588 OF

2019:

ROJER MATHEW Vs.

SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. AND

OTHERS.

88.CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 223

AND 458 OF 2008: RATTIRAM

AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF M.P.

THROUGH INSPECTOR OF

POLICE.

89.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1293 OF

2006: KALYANI BASKAR Vs. M.S.

SAMPORNAM.

90.AIR 1957 SC 540: GARIKAPATI

VEERAYA Vs. N. SUBBIAH

CHOUDHRY AND OTHER

91.1993 SUPP(1) SCC 96(2) : IN

MATTER OF: CAUVERY WATER

DISPUTES TRIBUNAL

372

92.(2019) 13 SCC 185: MEDICAL

COUNCIL OF INDIA Vs. STATE OF

KERALA AND OTHERS

93.(1978) 1 SCC 248: MRS. MANEKA

GANDHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND

ANOTHER

94.(2016) 8 SCC 509: ANITHA

KUSHWAHA Vs. PUSHAP SUDAN.

95.(2012) 2 SCC 584: MOHD.

HUSSAIN ALIAS ZULFIKAR ALI Vs.

STATE (GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF

DELHI)

96.(2012) 5 SCC 1: RAMLILA

MAIDAN INCIDENT, IN RE SUO

MOTU WP(CRL.) NO. 122 OF 2011,

DECIDED ON 23.02.2012.

97.(2015) 5 SCC 1: SHREYA

SINGHAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA.

98.AIR 1986 SC 180: OLGA TELLIS

AND OTHERS Vs. BOMBAY

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND

OTHERS

99.AIR 2017 SC 5500 : NIKESH

TARACHAND SHAH Vs. UNION OF

INDIA AND ANR.

CONTENTIONS RAISED BY LEARNED ADVOCATE GENERAL:

373

has contended that there is a presumption in favour of constitutionality of a statute and judicial review of legislation being struck down as ultra-vires of constitution can be under three (3) circumstances namely, (1) if the legislation is ultra-vires on account of legislative competence; (2) if the impugned legistation is ultra-vires on account of violation of any of the fundamental rights specified in Part-III of the Constitution; and (3) if there is manifest arbitrariness.

5.1 He would contend that impugned Act provides for measures to curb organized attempts to grab lands, whether belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, local authorities or other statutory and non statutory bodies owned or controlled or managed by the Government.

5.2 He would contend that several persons, group of person are indulging in large scale, unprecedented and fraudulent sale of lands which

374

had been grabbed resulting in large accumulation of unaccounted wealth and quick money to land grabbers and thereby adversely affecting public order. Hence, the appropriate Government found that it was necessary and expedient to curb such unlawful activity of land grabbing immediately and the impugned Act came into being after a joint legislature committee submitted its report identifying large and vast tracts of government land having been usurped by unscrupulous persons. It is also contended that said enactment has been duly passed by the legislature interalia under Entry 18 and 64 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India and for implementation and enforcement of the impugned Act the Special Courts have been constituted, which has resulted in recovery of 952.32 acres as on date.

5.3 Elaborating his submission he would contend that during the pendency of the present writ petitions, the State felt the need of amendment to be

375

brought in to allay the apprehensions expressed by the petitioners and in view of the said amendment having been brought by Act 30 of 2020, issue relating to trial of cases as warrant cases if felt necessary would clearly indicate that apprehensions are ill- founded. He would contend that amended Act 30 of 2020 has provided sufficient safeguard for dismissal of complaint at preliminary stage and if deemed fit the Special Court can try a complaint as warrant cases instead of summons cases. He would contend that once the chapter of summons case is accepted, the gravity of the case does not matter. It is not a matter of summary trial and the provisions of Cr.P.C. would be applicable.

5.4 He would further elaborate his contentions by contending that initial burden is upon the Government to prove that lands belongs to the Government and then the Special Court presumes that person who is alleged is a land grabber. He would contend that in modern trend of legislations,

376

the burden of proof would be on the accused and the impugned legislation having been enacted to protect the public properties, the reverse onus cast on the accused cannot be held as unconstitutional. He would draw the attention of the Court to the expression "prima-facie" found in Section 11 of the impugned Act to contend that initial burden is upon the State and only on discharge of the said burden, it shifts on the accused.

5.5 He would contend that contention of the petitioners that provisions under Section 4(2), 9(1) and Section 20 of the KLGP Act-2011 being retrospective in nature, renders them unconstitutional is erroneous as offences sought to be punished under the impugned Act is continuous in nature or in other words, a continuing offence and as such, contention of the petitioners are untenable.

5.6 He would submit that insofar as the issue of limitation raised, would not be a substantive right and there is no limitation to be followed and draws

377

the attention of the Court to Section 10 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to contend that the issue of limitation cannot be raised in respect of property having been vested in a Trust comprising of religious or charitable endowment.

5.7 Insofar as contention regarding unbridled power being vested with the Special Court under Section 9(1), he would contend that the said provision is not unregulated and a procedure has been prescribed under Regulation 29 of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition (Special Court) Regulations, 2017, whereunder, procedure has been prescribed for taking suo motu cognizance. Hence, he contends that it cannot be canvassed that the power vested under Section 9(1) of the Act is without any procedure. He would further submit that Special Court is headed for the present by a retired Judge of this Hon'ble Court and as such, it cannot be said

378

that power of taking suo motu cognizance would not be exercised cautiously.

5.8 He would contend that in order to remedy/curb the grabbing of the Government lands and the general public may be sceptical and hesitant to lodge complaints being fearful of any repercussions against them by a powerful land grabbers, if there were publicly seen as whistle blowers or informants, the suo motu cognizance power has been given to the Special Court. He would also contend that lands involved being public lands, it was deemed fit to introduce the provision regarding taking suo motu cognizance in view of the "public wrong" against an indeterminate number of people. He would submit that the Act in question being a penal legislation, the kind of provisions mentioned therein are very much necessary for effective implementation of the Act.

5.9 He would also contend that contention of wrongful exclusion of mens rea under the KLGP Act- 2011 is not a valid contention and draws the

379

attention of this Court to NDPS Act, whereunder possessing of contraband articles is to be read as "possession" with culpable state of mind, in view of the object and intent of the said Act. Drawing analogy from the said Act, he would contend that the intent of the present Act is to reclaim and recover public lands and the occupation/act of grabbing by the alleged land grabber is to be read as "conscious possession" of the act of land grabbing.

5.10 He would also submit that the legislation in question being a penal legislation, Section 16 has been incorporated as individual hardship caused due to the enactment of the statute has to give way to the larger public interest which is intended to be protected by this legislation. Hence, he has prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions.

5.11 He would also hasten to add that in the event of this Court were to arrive at the conclusion that any of the provisions are unworkable or loosely worded, this court is empowered to read down such

380

of the provisions by ironing out the creases, if any, in the legislation and it would not warrant striking down the legislation.

In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the following judgments: 1. AIR 1951 SC 467: HARLA Vs.

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN.

(1997) 2 SCC 453: STATE OF

BIHAR AND OTHERS Vs.

BIHAR DISTILLERY LTD AND

OTHERS.

(2010) 12 SCC 1 : BHANUMATI

AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF

UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND

OTHERS.

(1996) 3 SCC 709 : STATE OF

A.P. AND OTHERS Vs.

MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS.

(1959) SCR 279 : AIR 1958 SC

538 : SHRI RAM KRISHNA

DALMIA AND OTHERS Vs. SHRI

JUSTICE S.R. TENDOLKAR AND

OTHERS.

731 : MOHD. HANIF

QUARESHI AND OTHERS Vs.

STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS.

381

(2012) 6 SCC 312 : STATE OF

MADHYA PRADESH Vs.

REKESH KOHLI AND ANOTHER.

(1980) 2 SCC 665 : V.C. SHUKLA

AND OTHERS Vs. STATE

(DELHI ADMINISTRATION) AND

OTHERS.

123 : 1952 CRI LJ 805 : KATHI

RANING RAWAT Vs. STATE OF

SAURASHTRA.

10.(1979) 1 SUPREME COURT

CASES 380 : IN RE THE

SPECIAL COURTS BILL, 1978.

(2015) 6 SCC 222: MOHAN LAL

Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN.

(2012) 8 SCC 243 : BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA.

KRISHNA LAL AND OTHERS Vs.

GOVT. OF KERALA AND

ANOTHER.

(1994) 5 SCC 410 : SANJAY DUTT Vs. STATE THROUGH C.B.I., BOMBAY (II).

(2013) 1 SCC 745 : NAMIT SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA.

382

(1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS

(1996) 3 SCC 741: MAHE BEACH TRADING CO. AND OTHERS Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY AND OTHERS

(2002) 3 SCC 258 : KONDA

LAKSHMANA BAPUJI Vs. GOVT.

OF A.P. AND OTHERS

371/2017 : SRI. G.H. NAGARAJ

& ORS. Vs. STATE OF

KARNATAKA & ORS.

383

LAL Vs. KARTAR SINGH AND

OTHERS

(1998) 6 SCC 288: EMPLOYEE'S

STATE INSURANCE

CORPORATION Vs. S.K.

AGGARWAL AND OTHERS

(2004) 4 SCC 158: ZAHIRA

HABIBULLA H. SHEIKH AND

ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF

GUJARAT AND OTHERS.

29.WRIT PETITION NO. 3879 OF

2012 :2013 SCC BOM 833 :

SHRI.A.G. SAWANT Vs. SHRI.

SANJAY D. BERDE

BAHADUR SINGH AND ANOTHER

Vs. STATE OF VINDHYA

PRADESH.

31.(1994) 3 SCC 569: KARTAR

SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB.

32.1926 SCC ONLINE US SC 9: 269

US 385 (1926): 46 S.CT. 126: 70

L.ED.322:CONNALLY,

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR OF

OKLAHOMA, ETC . Vs. GENERAL

CONST.CO.

OF CUSTOMS, MADRAS Vs.

NATHELLA SAMPATHU CHETTY

AND ANR.

(2015) 9 SCC 502 : VIKRAM

SINGH ALIAS VICKY AND

384

ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

AND OTHERS

(2008) 1 S.C.R. 96, 2008 SCC 6

: MICHAEL ESTY FERGUSON Vs.

HER MAJESY THE QUEEN

36.(2009) 5 SCC 478:

LAXMINARASAMMA Vs. A.

YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS.

37.(2008) 5 SCC 580: SEEMA SILK

AND SAREES AND ANOTHER Vs.

DIRECTORATE OF

ENFORCEMENT AND OTHERS

38.(1994) 4 SCC 468: GUJARAT

AGRO INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. Vs.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF

THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD AND

OTHERS.

(1978) 3 SCC 544: MADHAV

HAYAWADANRAO HOSKOT Vs.

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

(1997) 3 SCC 261: L. CHANDRA

KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

AND OTHERS.

CONTENTIONS RAISED BY LEARNED ADVOCATES APPEARING FOR RESPONDENTS SUPPORTING THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE ENACTMENT.

385

Advocate appearing on behalf of M/s.Poovaiah and company have supported the learned Advocate General and have contended that impugned legislation would clear the test of constitutional validity. Smt.Chennamma, learned Advocate has drawn our attention to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of E.P.RAYAPPA vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU reported in AIR 1974 SC 55 to support her contention that impugned Act passes the test of reasonability. She would contend that by the impugned legislation, the public property or the property belonging to the Government which has been usurped or grabbed is sought to be remedied not only by prosecuting such persons who have indulged in such acts but also reclaim or recover such properties.

She would contend that unscrupulous persons who have knocked off the property of the State cannot pick loopholes in the procedural law and she has contended that impugned legislation does not suffer from any vice of

386

being discriminatory or arbitrary for being struck down. Hence, she has prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions. In support of her submissions, she has relied upon the following judgments:

(1) E.P.ROYAPPA vs STATE OF TAMIL

NADU

(AIR 1974 SC 555)

(2) SRI RAMAKRISHNA DALMIYA vs

SRI JUSTICE S.R.TENDOLKAR AND

OTHERS

(AIR 1958 SC 538)

(3) M.C.MEHTA vs UNION OF INDIA

(AIR 1987 SC 1086)

(4) NUPUR TALWAR vs C.B.I.

(2012)11 SCC 465

387

2014) and Amendment Act 30 of 2020 or any of its provision requires to be struck down on the ground of same being violative of the Constitution of India?"

DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS:

388

encroachment. The said Task Force was headed by Sri.V.Balasubramanyam, IAS (Retd), who submitted a report stating that thousands of acres of Government land had been encroached across the State by unscrupulous elements.

8.1 Above said two reports had highlighted the urgent need for a comprehensive legislation to tackle the wide spread encroachment of Government lands, perforced the Government of Karnataka to bring in the legislation of KLGP Act-2011, to prevent illegal and unlawful encroachment of Government lands and to proceed against such persons who had encroached Government lands, by initiating civil and criminal proceedings.

8.2 The statement of reasons and the object of said enactment would indicate that large scale of land grabbing have been going on in and around Bangalore and also in the State of Karnataka and thousands of acres of Government lands were being

389

encroached and usurped by unscrupulous persons and there was an urgent need to bring in a legislation.

8.3 The said enactment has been passed by the Legislature under Entry 18 and 64 of List II of the VII Schedule of the Constitution of India and had received the assent of the President on 09.10.2014 and as already observed herein above, it has been brought into effect from 20.10.2014.

8.4 The object sought to be achieved by the said enactment and reasons for said enactment being brought into force have been elaborated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons. It reads:

"It has come to the notice of the Government that there are organised attempts on the part of certain lawless persons operating individually and in groups to grab either by force or by deceit or otherwise lands belonging to the Government, a local authority, a religious or charitable institution or endowment, including a wakf. The land grabbers are forming bogus co- operative housing societies or setting up fictitious claims and indulging in

390

large scale and unprecedented and fradulent sales of land through unscrupulous real estate dealers or otherwise in favour of certain sections of people, resulting in large scale accumulation of the unaccounted wealth. As public order is adversely affected by such lawful activities of land grabbers in the State, particularly in respect of urban and urbanisable lands, the State Government has felt that it is necessary to curb such unlawful activities immediately by enacting a special law in this regard.

Hence, the State Government of Karnataka with a view to prohibit the activities of land grabbing and to provide for matters connected therewith has proposed to bring the Karnataka Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act into force. Apart from declaring land grabbing as unlawful, the State Government desires to prohibit land grabbing. Therefore, it is proposed to provide for penalty for offences in connection with land grabbing to effectively implement this Act and for the purpose of providing speedy enquiry into an alleged act of land grabbing and trial of cases in respect of the ownership and title to, or lawful possession of the land grabbed by Notification constitute a Special Court. It is felt that the State Government will be able to curb the illegal land grabbing by enforcing the proposed legislation.

Accordingly, the Karnataka Bhu Kabalike (Nishedha) Vidheyaka,

391

2007 as passed by both the houses the Stat Legislature was sent to Government of India to obtain the assent of the President.

The Government of India in its letter No.17/20/2007- Judl and PP dated 16/20.8.2007, on the suggestion made by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs had suggested modification to the Karnataka Bhu kabalike (Nisheda) Vidyeyaka 2007. Accordingly clause 6 of the Bill has been modified by incorporating Explanation for the word Company and Director.

The Government of India vide letter No. 17/20/2007- Judl & PP dated:18-06-2010, had suggested modifications to sub-clause (2) of clause 2 of the Bill on th suggestions made by the Ministry of Minority Affairs and also to the sub-clause (2) of clause 1 of the Bill on th suggestion made by the Department of Legal Affairs. Accordingly the State Government vide its letter No.DPAL 22 SHASHANA 2007, dated 7.9.2020 Communicated its acceptance to make the said modification by amending the Bill, by extending the provisions to the lands belonging to the Wakfs, Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments and requested the Government of India to obtain the assent of the President to the said Bill and also to obtain previous instructions to the modifications to be issued in the form of an Ordinance.

392

The Government of India vide its letter No.17/20/2007-Judl & PP dated:03-03-2010/2011 has directed the State Government to consider withdrawing the present Bill (LA Bill No.27 of 2007) and submit a modified Bill instead of concurrent promulgation of any amendment Ordinance.

Hence the Bill."

RE: CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A STATUTE - ANALYSIS

393

"But when a statute has some meaning even though it obscure, or several meanings, even though it is little to choose between them, the courts have to say what meaning the statute is to bear, rather than reject it as a nullity."

394

would state what meaning the statute should bear rather than rendering the statute a nullity.

395

the ground that such construction is more consistent with the alleged object and policy of the act".

"17. Now coming to the reasoning in the impugned judgment, we must say with all respect that we have not been able to appreciate it.

396

The approach of the Court, while examining the challenge to the constitutionality of an enactment, is to start with the presumption of constitutionality. The Court should try to sustain its validity to the extent possible. It should strike down the enactment only when it is not possible to sustain it. The Court should not approach the enactment with a view to pick holes or to search for defects of drafting, much less inexactitude of language employed. Indeed, any such defects of drafting should be ironed out as part of the attempt to sustain the validity/constitutionality of the enactment. After all, an Act made by the Legislature represents the will of the people and that cannot be lightly interfered with. The unconstitutionality must be plainly and clearly established before an enactment is declared as void. The same approach holds good while ascertaining the intent and purpose of an enactment or its scope and application. Now, the result of the impugned judgment is that the Amending Act has become an exercise in futility - a purposeless piece of Legislation. And this result has been arrived at by pointing out some drafting errors and some imperfection in the language employed. If only the High Court had looked into the minutes of the meeting dated 15-12-1989 and the two letters of the Commissioner aforementioned, it would have become clear that the Amending Act was doing no more than repeating contents of the said letters

397

and placing the legislative imprimatur on them. As the impugned judgment itself suggests, part of the imperfection of language is perhaps attributable to translation from Hindi to English. Indeed, it is surprising that the Court has not even referred to the long preamble to the Act which clearly sets out the context and purpose of the said enactment. It was put in at such length only with a view to aid the interpretation of its provisions. It was not done without a purpose. To call the entire exercise a mere waste is, to say the least, most unwarranted besides being uncharitable. The Court must recognize the fundamental nature and importance of legislative process and accord due regard and deference to it, just as the Legislature and the Executive are expected to show due regard and deference to the judiciary. It cannot also be forgotten that our Constitution recognizes and gives effect to the concept of equality between the three wings of the State and the concept of `checks and balances' inherent in such scheme."

398

BHANUMATI AND OTHERS vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS reported in (2010) 12 SCC 1 has held: "82. In STATE OF BIHAR vs. BIHAR DISTILLERY LTD. this Court in SCC para 17 at p. 466: JT para 18 at pp. 865-66 of the Report laid down certain principles on how to judge the constitutionality of an enactment. This Court held that in this exercise the Court should:

(a) try to sustain validity of the impugned law to the extent possible. It can strike down the enactment only when it is impossible to sustain it;

(b) the Court should not approach the enactment with a view to pick holes or to search for defects of drafting or for the language employed;

(c) the Court should consider that the Act made by the legislature represents the will of the people and that cannot be lightly interfered with;

(d) the Court should strike down the Act only when the unconstitutionality is plainly and clearly established;

(e) the Court must recognize the fundamental nature and importance of legislative process and accord due regard and deference to it.

This Court abstracted those principles from various judgments of this Court.

399

a judge in construing a statute must proceed on the constructive task of finding the intention of Parliament and this must be done (a) not only from the language of the statute but also (b) upon consideration of the social conditions which gave rise to it (c) and also of the mischief to remedy which the statute was passed and if necessary (d) the judge must supplement the written word so as to give "force and life" to the intention of the legislature. According to Lord Denning these are the principles laid down in Heydon case and is considered one of the safest guides today. This Court also accepted those principles. (See Bihar Distillery Ltd. case, SCC para 20 at p. 468: JT para 21 at p. 867 of the Report.)

400

persuaded Parliament into passing the Act would be of no use at all. (See SCC p.730, para 16 of the Report).

401

(2015) 2 SCC (Crl.) 449 has held that a statutory provision can also be invalidated on the ground of vagueness, too, which is once again traceable to arbitrariness resulting in violation of Article 14 or Article 20 of the Constitution. It has been further held:

"55. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held in a series of judgments that where no reasonable standards are laid down to define guilt in a Section which creates an offence, and where no clear guidance is given to either law abiding citizens or to authorities and courts, a Section which creates an offence and which is vague must be struck down as being arbitrary and unreasonable. Thus, in Musser v. Utah a Utah statute which

402

outlawed conspiracy to commit acts injurious to public morals was struck down.

"1141. Obscene prints and articles. -(1) A person......who, (2) Prints, utters, publishes, sells, lends, gives away, distributes or shows, or has in his possession with intent to sell, lend, give away, distribute or show, or otherwise offers for sale, loan, gift or distribution, any book, pamphlet, magazine, newspaper or other printed paper devoted to the publication, and principally made up of criminal news, police reports, or accounts of criminal deeds, or pictures, or stories of deeds of bloodshed, lust or crime;

Is guilty of a misdemeanor, .....'"

The court in striking down the said statute held: (L Ed. pp. 851-52)

"The impossibility of defining the precise line between permissible uncertainty in statutes caused by describing crimes by words well understood through long use in the criminal law - obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, indecent or disgusting-and the unconstitutional vagueness that leaves a person uncertain as to the kind of prohibited conduct-massing stories to incite

403

crime-has resulted in three arguments of this case in this Court. The legislative bodies in draftsmanship obviously have the same difficulty as do the judicial in interpretation. Nevertheless despite the difficulties, courts must do their best to determine whether or not the vagueness is of such a character 'that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning.' Connally v. General Construction Co., U.S. p.391; S.Ct. p.127. The entire text of the statute or the subjects dealt with may furnish an adequate standard. The present case as to a vague statute abridging free speech involves the circulation of only vulgar magazines. The next may call for decision as to free expression of political views in the light of a statute intended to punish subversive activities.

The sub-section of the New York Penal Law, as now interpreted by the Court of Appeals prohibits distribution of a magazine principally made up of criminal news or stories of deeds of bloodshed, or lust, so massed as to become vehicles for inciting violent and depraved crimes against the person. But even considering the gloss put upon the literal meaning by the Court of Appeals' restriction of the statute to collections of stories 'so massed as to become vehicles for inciting violent and depraved crimes against the person … … not necessarily ……. sexual passion', we find the specification of publications, prohibited from distribution, too uncertain and indefinite to justify the conviction of this petitioner. Even

404

though all detective tales and treatises on criminology are not forbidden, and though publications made up of criminal deeds not characterized by bloodshed or lust are omitted from the interpretation of the Court of Appeals, we think fair use of collections of pictures and stories would be interdicted because of the utter impossibility of the actor or the trier to know where this new standard of guilt would draw the line between the allowable and the forbidden publications. No intent or purpose is required-no indecency or obscenity in any sense heretofore known to the law. 'So massed as to incite to crime' can become meaningful only by concrete instances. This one example is not enough. The clause proposes to punish the printing and circulation of publications that courts or juries may think influence generally persons to commit crime of violence against the person. No conspiracy to commit a crime is required. See Musser v. State of Utah, this Term. It is not an effective notice of new crime. The clause has no technical or common law meaning. Nor can light as to the meaning be gained from the section as a whole or the Article of the Penal Law under which it appears. As said in the Cohen Grocery Co. case, (US at p. 89: S.Ct at p. 300): (L.Ed p.520)

'….. It leaves open, therefore, the widest conceivable inquiry, the scope of which no one can foresee and the result of which no one can foreshadow or adequately guard against.'

405

The statute as construed by the Court of Appeals does not limit punishment to the indecent and obscene, as formerly understood. When stories of deeds of bloodshed, such as many in the accused magazines, are massed so as to incite to violent crimes, the statute is violated. It does not seem to us that an honest distributor of publications could know when he might be held to have ignored such a prohibition. Collections of tales of war horrors, otherwise unexceptionable, might well be found to be 'massed' so as to become 'vehicles for inciting violent and depraved crimes'. Where a statute is so vague as to make criminal an innocent act, a conviction under it cannot be sustained. Herndon v. Lowry, US p. 259: S Ct p.739."

406

drastic power over the minds of men. We not only do not know but cannot know what is condemnable by 'sacrilegious.' And if we cannot tell, how are those to be governed by the statute to tell?"

407

enforcement of the law does not take place.

"'[N]o person, while on public or private grounds adjacent to any building in which a school or any class thereof is in session, shall willfully make or assist in the making of any noise or diversion which disturbs or tends to disturb the peace or good order of such school session or class thereof. . . .' Code of Ordinances, c 28, 19.2(a)."

The law on the subject of vagueness was clearly stated thus: (Grained case, L Ed pp.227 -28)

"It is a basic principle of due process that an enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined. Vague laws offend several important values. First, because we assume that man is free to steer between lawful and unlawful conduct, we insist that laws give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly. Vague laws may trap the innocent by not providing fair warning. Second, if arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them. A vague law impermissibly delegates basic policy matters to policemen,

408

judges, and juries for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis, with the attendant dangers of arbitrary and discriminatory application. Third, but related, where a vague statute 'abut(s) upon sensitive areas of basic First Amendment freedoms,' it 'operates to inhibit the exercise of (those) freedoms'. Uncertain meanings inevitably lead citizens to '"steer far wider of the unlawful zone" .... than if the boundaries of the forbidden areas were clearly marked.'"

409

basic reasons - that it deals with a penal offence created for persons who use the internet as also for the reason that the statute which was adjudged unconstitutional uses the expression "patently offensive" which comes extremely close to the expression "grossly offensive" used by the impugned Section 66-A. Section 223(d), which was adjudged unconstitutional, is set out hereinbelow: (US p.860)

"223 (d) Whoever- "(1) in interstate or foreign communications knowingly- (A) uses an interactive computer service to send to a specific person or persons under 18 years of age, or (B) uses any interactive computer service to display in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age, 'any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs, regardless of whether the user of such service placed the call or initiated the communication; or (2) knowingly permits any telecommunications facility under such person's control to be used for an activity prohibited by paragraph (1) with the intent that it be used for such activity,

410

shall be fined under Title 18, or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Interestingly, the District Court Judge writing of the internet said: "[I]t is no exaggeration to conclude that the Internet has achieved, and continues to achieve, the most participatory marketplace of mass speech that this country - and indeed the world - as yet seen. The plaintiffs in these actions correctly describe the 'democratizing' effects of Internet communication: individual citizens of limited means can speak to a worldwide audience on issues of concern to them. Federalists and Anti- federalists may debate the structure of their government nightly, but these debates occur in newsgroups or chat rooms rather than in pamphlets. Modern-day Luthers still post their theses, but to electronic bulletins boards rather than the door of the Wittenberg Schlosskirche. More mundane (but from a constitutional perspective, equally important) dialogue occurs between aspiring artists, or French cooks, or dog lovers, or fly fishermen." American Civil Liberties Union v. Reno, F Supp at p.881. (at p.425).

411

speech, the impugned Act effectively suppresses a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive and to address to one another.

"A fundamental principle in our legal system is that laws which regulate persons or entities must give fair notice of conduct that is forbidden or required. See Connally v. General Construction Co., US 391 ("[A] statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law"); Papachristou v. Jacksonville, US. 162 ("Living under a rule of law entails various suppositions, one of which is that '[all persons] are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids'" (quoting Lanzetta v. New Jersey, US

412

453 (alteration in original))). This requirement of clarity in regulation is essential to the protections provided by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. See United States v. Williams, US 304. It requires the invalidation of laws that are impermissibly vague. A conviction or punishment fails to comply with due process if the statute or regulation under which it is obtained "fails to provide a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of what is prohibited, or is so standardless that it authorizes or encourages seriously discriminatory enforcement." Ibid. As this Court has explained, a regulation is not vague because it may at times be difficult to prove an incriminating fact but rather because it is unclear as to what fact must be proved. See id., at 306.

Even when speech is not at issue, the void for vagueness doctrine addresses at least two connected but discrete due process concerns: first, that regulated parties should know what is required of them so they may act accordingly; second, precision and guidance are necessary so that those enforcing the law do not act in an arbitrary or discriminatory way. See Grayned v. Rockford, US 108-109. When speech is involved, rigorous adherence to those requirements is necessary to ensure that ambiguity does not chill protected speech."

413

and the offence created by Section 4-A of the Goondas Act was, therefore, violative of Article 19(1)(d) and (e) of the Constitution. It was stated: (SCR pp. 979-80 : AIR pp. 297-98, paras 9- 10)

"Incidentally it would also be relevant to point out that the definition of the word "goonda" affords no assistance in deciding which citizen can be put under that category. It is an inclusive definition and it does not indicate which tests have to be applied in deciding whether a person falls in the first part of the definition. Recourse to the dictionary meaning of the word would hardly be of any assistance in this matter. After all it must be borne in mind that the Act authorises the District Magistrate to deprive a citizen of his fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(d) and (e), and though the object of the Act and its purpose would undoubtedly attract the provisions of Article 19(5) care must always be taken in passing such Acts that they provide sufficient safeguards against casual, capricious or even malicious exercise of the powers conferred by them. It is well known that the relevant provisions of the Act are initially put in motion against a person at a lower level than the District magistrate, and so it is always necessary that sufficient safeguards should be provided by the Act to protect the fundamental rights of innocent citizens and to save them from unnecessary harassment. That is why we think the definition of the word 'goonda' should have given necessary assistance to the District

414

Magistrate in deciding whether a particular citizen falls under the category of goonda or not; that is another infirmity in the Act. As we have already pointed out s. 4-A suffers from the same infirmities as s. 4.

Having regard to the two infirmities in Sections 4, 4-A respectively we do not think it would be possible to accede to the argument of the Learned Advocate-General that the operative portion of the Act can fall under Article 19(5) of the Constitution. The person against whom action can be taken under the Act is not entitled to know the source of the information received by the District Magistrate; he is only told about his prejudicial activities on which the satisfaction of the District Magistrate is based that action should be taken against him under s.4 or s. 4-A. In such a case it is absolutely essential that the Act must clearly indicate by a proper definition or otherwise when and under what circumstances a person can be called a goonda, and it must impose an obligation on the District Magistrate to apply his mind to the question as to whether the person against whom complaints are received is such a goonda or not. It has been urged before us that such an obligation is implicit in Sections 4 and 4-A. We are, however, not impressed by this argument. Where a statute empowers the specified authorities to take preventive action against the citizens it is essential that it should expressly make it a part of the duty of the said authorities to satisfy themselves about the existence of what the statute

415

regards as conditions precedent to the exercise of the said authority. If the statute is silent in respect of one of such conditions precedent it undoubtedly constitutes a serious infirmity which would inevitably take it out of the provisions of Article 19(5). The result of this infirmity is that it has left to the unguided and unfettered discretion of the authority concerned to treat any citizen as a goonda. In other words, the restrictions which it allows to be imposed on the exercise of the fundamental right of a citizen guaranteed by Article 19(1)(d) and (e) must in the circumstances be held to be unreasonable. That is the view taken by the High court and we see no reason to differ from it."

416

Bench of this Court lays down that an Indian Act cannot be declared invalid on the ground that it violates the due process clause or that it is vague......"

"These observations which are clearly obiter are apt to be too generally applied and need to be explained. While it is true that the principles evolved by the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the application of the Fourteenth Amendment were eschewed in our Constitution and instead the limits of restrictions on each fundamental right were indicated in the clauses that follow the first clause of the nineteenth article, it cannot be said as an absolute principle that no law will be considered bad for sheer vagueness. There is ample authority for the proposition that a law affecting fundamental rights may be so considered. A very pertinent example is to be found in State of M.P. v. Baldeo Prasad, where the Central Provinces and Berar Goondas Act, 1946 was declared void for uncertainty. The condition for the application of Sections 4 and 4-A was that the person sought to be proceeded against must be a goonda but the definition of goonda in the Act indicated no tests for deciding which person fell within the definition. The provisions were therefore held to be uncertain and vague.

417

The real rule is that if a law is vague or appears to be so, the court must try to construe it, as far as may be, and language permitting, the construction sought to be placed on it, must be in accordance with the intention of the legislature. Thus if the law is open to diverse construction, that construction which accords best with the intention of the legislature and advances the purpose of legislation, is to be preferred. Where however the law admits of no such construction and the persons applying it are in a boundless sea of uncertainty and the law prima facie takes away a guaranteed freedom, the law must be held to offend the Constitution as was done in the case of the Goonda Act. This is not application of the doctrine of due process. The invalidity arises from the probability of the misuse of the law to the detriment of the individual. If possible, the Court instead of striking down the law may itself draw the line of demarcation where possible but this effort should be sparingly made and only in the clearest of cases."

418

the Act by Act 30 of 2020 whereunder, certain provisions of the KLGP Act-2011 came to be amended.

An interlocutory application for amendment of the pleadings and additional prayer seeking the amended provisions also being struck down has been raised in W.P.No.11975/2018.

419

I. The land claimed to be owned or purchased or converted from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes:

Sl.No. Writ Petitions 1 W.P.No.47747/2017 2 W.P.No.433/2017 3 W.P.No.10728/2017 4 W.P.No.15532/2017 5 W.P.No.32134/2017 6 W.P.No.34202/2017 7 W.P.No.36760/2017 8 W.P.No.37713/2017 9 W.P.No.235/2018 10 W.P.No.777/2018 11 W.P.No.1348/2018 12 W.P.No.1395/2018 13 W.P.No.5704/2018 14 W.P.No.6330/2018 15 W.P.No.6376/2018 16 W.P.No.6583/2018 17 W.P.No.7868/2018 18 W.P.No.11029/2018 19 W.P.No.14390/2018 20 W.P.No.15257/2018 21 W.P.No.18646/2018 22 W.P.No.23435/2018 23 W.P.No.23437/2018 24 W.P.No.23819/2018 25 W.P.No.50668/2018 26 W.P.No.52106/2018 27 W.P.No.55214/2018 28 W.P.No.56168/2018 29 W.P.No.56539/2018 30 W.P.No.56542/2018 31 W.P.No.57174/2018 32 W.P.No.8852/2019 33 W.P.No.11090/2019 34 W.P.No.11091/2019 35 W.P.No.13029/2019

420

36 W.P.No.13737/2019 37 W.P.No.22667/2019 38 W.P.No.23573/2019 39 W.P.No.27597/2019 40 W.P.No.27625/2019 41 W.P.No.29604/2019 42 W.P.No.33249/2019 43 W.P.No.35277/2019 44 W.P.No.38895/2019 45 W.P.No.50828/2019 46 W.P.No.51944/2019 47 W.P.No.51945/2019 48 W.P.No.11767/2019 49 W.P.No.50244/2019 50 W.P.No.52609/2018 51 W.P.No.3190/2020

II. The lands which has been granted under the provisions of Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, Karnataka Land Grant Rules and/or other Act, Rule or Regulation, etc.

Sl.No. Writ petitions 1 W.P.No.16281/2017 2 W.P.No.25219/2017 3 W.P.No.45114/2017 4 W.P.No.52972/2017 5 W.P.No.54081/2017 6 W.P.No.54082/2017 7 W.P.No.55683/2017 8 W.P.No.4729/2018 9 W.P.No.6061/2018 10 W.P.No.6960/2018 11 W.P.No.8585/2018 12 W.P.No.9116/2018

421

13 W.P.No.9117/2018 14 W.P.No.14215/2018 15 W.P.No.22817/2018 16 W.P.No.25761/2018 17 W.P.No.25768/2018 18 W.P.No.27912/2018 19 W.P.No.32121/2018 20 W.P.No.36539/2018 21 W.P.No.47841/2018 22 W.P.No.49013/2018 23 W.P.No.51638/2019 24 W.P.No.53049/2018 25 W.P.No.53534/2018 26 W.P.No.56545/2018 27 W.P.No.9158/2019 28 W.P.No.13029/2019 29 W.P.No.18151/2019 30 W.P.No.23515/2019 31 W.P.No.28421/2019 32 W.P.No.29668/2019 33 W.P.No.52134/2019 34 W.P.No.51926/2019

III. Where the land encroached is said to be Government land/Gomal land/Forest land by the authorities:

Sl.No Writ petitions 1 W.P.No.17180/2017 2 W.P.No.21279/2017 3 W.P.No.23095/2017 4 W.P.No.23800/2017 5 W.P.No.27573/2017 6 W.P.No.32849/2017 7 W.P.No.51160/2017 8 W.P.No.463/2018 9 W.P.No.3032/2018 (PIL)

422

10 W.P.No.3641/2018 11 W.P.No.5389/2018 12 W.P.No.5390/2018 13 W.P.No.5391/2018 14 W.P.No.8210/2018 15 W.P.No.11306/2018 16 W.P.No.18327/2018 17 W.P.No.18329/2018 18 W.P.No.26481/2018 19 W.P.No.28214/2018 20 W.P.No.28215/2018 21 W.P.No.28637/2018 22 W.P.No.33741/2018 23 W.P.No.34292/2018 24 W.P.No.35489/2018 25 W.P.No.36459/2018 26 W.P.No.36863/2018 27 W.P.No.40311/2018 28 W.P.No.41277/2018 29 W.P.No.43275/2018 30 W.P.No.47540/2018 31 W.P.No.47543/2018 32 W.P.No.47827/2018 33 W.P.No.53025/2018 34 W.P.No.53204/2018 35 W.P.No.54914/2018 36 W.P.No.56187/2018 37 W.P.No.56410/2018 38 W.P.No.56630/2018 39 W.P.No.56631/2018 40 W.P.No.56731/2018 41 W.P.No.56988/2018 42 W.P.No.1680/2019 43 W.P.No.2960/2019 44 W.P.No.7448/2019 45 W.P.No.7844/2019 46 W.P.No.10906/2019 47 W.P.No.12900/2019 48 W.P.No.12975/2019 49 W.P.No.13405/2019 50 W.P.No.20311/2019

423

51 W.P.No.20312/2019 52 W.P.No.20313/2019 53 W.P.No.20314/2019 54 W.P.No.20315/2019 55 W.P.No.20316/2019 56 W.P.No.22678/2019 57 W.P.No.27680/2019 58 W.P.No.27730/2019 59 W.P.No.30187/2019 60 W.P.No.31106/2019 61 W.P.No.31107/209 62 W.P.No.31322/2019 63 W.P.No.31349/2019 64 W.P.No.31350/2019 65 W.P.No.32184/2019 66 W.P.no.33262/2019 67 W.P.No.34572/2019 68 W.P.No.36127/2019 69 W.P.No.38110/2019 70 W.P.No.38701/2019 71 W.P.No.40447/2019 72 W.P.No.40448/2019 73 W.P.No.40450/2019 74 W.P.No.41715/2019 75 W.P.No.41716/2019 76 W.P.No.50781/2019 77 W.P.No.50955/2019 78 W.P.No.50956/2019 79 W.P.No.51043/2019 80 W.P.No.51101/2019 81 W.P.No.51710/2019 82 W.P.No.51830/2019 83 W.P.No.51941/2019 84 W.P.No.51961/2019 85 W.P.No.45660/2018 86 W.P.No.13737/2019 87 W.P.No.52032/2019 88 W.P.No.9647/2020 89 W.P.No.12647/2020

424

IV. Where applications have been filed by the applicants for regularisation of land under different enactments and same is pending before the revenue authorities;

Sl.No. Writ petitions 1 W.P.No.27437/2017 2 W.P.No.56296/2017 3 W.P.No.9194/2018 4 W.P.No.22025/2018 5 W.P.No.26054/2018 6 W.P.No.26545/2018 7 W.P.No.26546/2018 8 W.P.NO.29281/2018 9 W.P.No.33339/2018 10 W.P.No.36737/2018 11 W.P.No.39179/2018 12 W.P.No.43352/2018 13 W.P.No.49786/2018 14 W.P.No.51528/2018 15 W.P.No.55172/2018 16 W.P.No.302/2019 17 W.P.No.3463/2019 18 W.P.No.3484/2019 19 W.P.No.5393/2019 20 W.P.No.8821/2019 21 W.P.No.12974/2019 22 W.P.No.22988/2019 23 W.P.No.27336/2019 24 W.P.No.27921/2019 25 W.P.No.28900/2019 26 W.P.No.29471/2019 27 W.P.No.35575/2019 28 W.P.No.35579/2019 29 W.P.No.42273/2019 30 W.P.No.51878/2019 31 W.P.No.51879/2019 32 W.P.No.52011/2019 33 W.P.No.52566/2019

425

34 W.P.No.45583/2019 35 W.P.No.220/2020

V. Where the applicants are claiming the lands having been granted to them or to their ancestors/predecessors in title. (tenancy lands)

Sl.No. Writ petitions 1 W.P.33085/2017 2 W.P.No.12264/2018 3 W.P.No.12614/2018 4 W.P.No.15270/2018 5 W.P.No.19761/2018

VI. Suo motu proceedings having been initiated on the ground of encroachment of Government lands.

Sl.No. Writ petitions 1 W.P.No.35384/2017 2 W.P.No.36324/2017 3 W.P.No.36610/2017 4 W.P.No.36640/2017 5 W.P.No.36690/2017 6 W.P.No.40597/2017 7 W.P.No.41593/2017 8 W.P.No.42959/2017 9 W.P.No.43059/2017 10 W.P.No.43227/2017 11 W.P.No.44273/2017 12 W.P.No.44687/2017 13 W.P.No.47887/2017 14 W.P.No.50674/2017 15 W.P.No.53008/2017 16 W.P.No.54035/2017

426

17 W.P.No.8035/2018 18 W.P.No.8186/2018 19 W.P.No.8187/2018 20 W.P.No.8189/2018 21 W.P.No.8190/2018 22 W.P.No.8191/2018 23 W.P.No.11973/2018 24 W.P.No.11975/2018 25 W.P.No.13112/2018 26 W.P.No.19751/2018 27 W.P.No.22837/2018 28 W.P.No.34675/2018 29 W.P.No.47066/2018 30 W.P.No.52017/2018 31 W.P.No.53830/2018 32 W.P.No.1660/2019 33 W.P.No.5576/2019 34 W.P.No.7844/2019 35 W.P.No.8298/2019 36 W.P.No.22935/2019 37 W.P.No.30073/2019

(1) it is made applicable retrospectively;

(2) arbitrariness is writ large;

427

(3) right of appeal and revision not being

available, takes away the right of an

aggrieved person;

(4) reverse onus clause or burden of proof is

erroneous and opposed to cannons of

criminal jurisprudence; (5) KLGP ACT-2011 provides for criminal trial before the Special Court to be summary trial, whereas punishment to be imposed under Section 4 of the Act being not less than one year and which may extend to three years would be contrary to Section 262 of Cr.P.C. (6) Section 9 of KLGP Act-2011 is hit by Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India as procedure prescribed is unworkable. (7) vicarious liability is fixed on a Director of company; (8) absence of mens rea;

428

(9) transfer of cases from Civil Court to Special Court under Section 20 takes away jurisdiction of Civil Court; (10) though Section 7 mandates constitution of Additional Benches across the State, same have not been constituted; (11) amendment Act provided for abatement of proceedings only in respect of two enactments and it is discriminatory.

429

"2. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

(a) xxx

(b) xxx

(c) xxx

(d)“Land’’ includes,- (i) land belonging to the Government, Wakf or the Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments, a local authority, a statutory or non statutory body owned, controlled or managed by the Government;

(ii) rights in or over land, benefits to arise out of land, and buildings, structures and other things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth;

(e)“land grabber’’ means a person or group of persons or a Society, who commits or has committed land grabbing and includes any person who gives financial aid to any person for taking illegal possession of lands or for construction of unauthorised structures thereon, or who collects or attempts to collect from any occupiers of such lands rent, compensation and other charges by criminal intimidation, or who abets the doing of any of the above mentioned acts; and also includes the successors in interest;

(f)“land grabbing’’ means every activity of grabbing of any land, without any lawful entitlement and with a view to illegally taking possession of such land, or enter into or create illegal tenancies or lease and licences

430

agreements construct unauthorised structures thereon for sale or hire, or give such lands to any person on rental or lease and

license basis for construction, or use and occupation, of unauthorised structures; and the term “to grab land’’ shall be construed accordingly;

offence punishable under this Act.

(2) Any person who, on or after the commencement of this Act, continue to be in occupation, otherwise than as a lawful tenant, of a grabbed land belonging to the Government, Wakf, Hindu Religious Institution and Charitable Endowments, local authority, statutory or non-statutory body owned, controlled or managed by the State Government shall be guilty of an offence under this Act.

(3) Whoever contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to three years, and with fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees.

431

(a) sells or allots, or offers or advertises for sale or allotment, or has in is possession for the purpose of sale or allotment any land grabbed;

(b) instigates or incites any person to commit land grabbing;

(c) uses any land grabbed or causes or permits knowingly to be used for purposes, connected with sale or allotment; or

(d) enters into an agreement for construction of any structure or buildings on such land;

(e) causes or procures or attempts to procure any person to do any of above mentioned acts; shall, on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees.

432

offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly:

Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person liable to any punishment if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he has exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of the such offence.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any such offence has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of or is attributable to any neglect on the part of any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.

Explanation.- For the purposes of this section:-

(a) “company, trust, firm, society” means respectively a company defined under the Companies Act, 1956 (Act No.1 of 1956), trust defined under the Indian Trust Act, 1882 (Act No.2 of 1882), firm defined in the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 (Act No.9 of 1932), Society defined in the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (Karnataka Act 17 of 1960) or other association of individuals; and

(b) “director’’ in relation to:-

433

(i) a company means the director as defined in sub-section (13) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 1956 and partner means a partner in the firm;

(ii) a society, a trust or other association of individuals, means the person who is entrusted under the relevant provisions of the Act or rules of the society, trust or other association with management of the affairs of the society, trust or other association, as the case may be.

(2) A Special Court shall initially consist of a Chairman and four other members, to be appointed by the Government.

(3) The Chairman shall be a person who is or was a judge of a High Court and of the other four members, two shall be persons who are or were District Judges (hereinafter referred to as Judicial Members) and the other two members shall be persons who hold or have held a post not below the rank of a Deputy Commissioner of the District (hereinafter referred to as Revenue Members):

434

Provided that the appointment of a person who was a Judge of a High Court as the Chairman of the Special Court shall be made after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court.

(4) The Government, if, it is of the opinion that Additional Bench of the Special Court is necessary for trial of such cases, may likewise constitute Additional Bench of Special Court, by notification, in respect of such area, as may be specified therein.

(5) Such Additional Bench shall consist of one Judicial member and one Revenue member with a qualification specified in sub-section (3).

(6) The Government from time to time likewise, by notification, reconstitute the Special Court constituted under sub-section (1).

(7) The Chairman or other member shall hold office as such for a term of three years from the date on which he enters upon his office, or until the Special Court is reconstituted whichever is later.

(8) (a) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Special Court may be exercised by benches thereof one comprising of the Chairman, a judicial member and a Revenue member and the other comprising of a Judicial Member and a Revenue member.

435

(b) Where the bench comprises of the Chairman, he shall be the Presiding Officer of such a bench and where the bench consists of two members, the Judicial Member shall be the Presiding Officer.

(c) It shall be competent for the Chairman either suo-moto or on a reference made to him to withdraw any case pending before the bench comprising of two members and dispose of the same or to transfer any case from one bench to another bench. (d) Where it is reasonably apprehended that the trial of Civil liability of a person accused of an offence under this Act, is likely to take considerable time, it shall be

competent for the Chairman to entrust the trial of the criminal liability of such offender to another bench in the interest of speedy disposal of the case.

(e) Where a case under this Act is heard by a bench consisting of two members and the members thereof are divided in opinion, the case with their opinions shall be laid before another judicial member or the Chairman and that member or Chairman, as the case may be after such hearing as he thinks fit, shall deliver his opinion and the decision or order shall follow that opinion.

(9) The quorum to constitute a meeting of any bench of the Special Court shall be two.

(10) No act or proceeding of the Special Court shall be deemed to be invalid by reason only of the existence

436

of any vacancy among its members or any defect in the constitution or re- constitution thereof.

(2) The Special Court shall for the purpose of taking cognizance of the case, consider the location, or extent or value of the land alleged to have been grabbed or of the substantial nature of the evil involved or in the interest of justice required or any other relevant matter.

(3) In respect of an alleged act of land grabbing or the determination of questions of title and ownership to, or lawful possession of any land grabbed under this Act and offences specified in Chapter XIV-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, shall be tried only in a Special Court constituted for the area in which the land grabbed is situated; and the decision of the Special Court shall be final:

Provided that if, in the opinion of the Special Court, any application filed before it, is prima facie frivolous or

437

vexatious, it shall reject the same without any further enquiry.

(4) The Special Court shall determine the order in which the civil and criminal liability against a land grabber be initiated. It shall be within the discretion of the Special Court whether or not to deliver its decision or order until both civil and criminal proceedings are completed. The evidence admitted during the criminal proceeding may be made use of while trying the civil liability. But additional evidence, if any adduced in the civil proceedings shall not be considered by the Special Court while determining the criminal liability. Any person accused of land grabbing or the abetment thereof before the Special Court shall be a competent witness for the defence and may give evidence on oath in disproof of the charge made against him or any person charged together with him in the criminal proceeding:

Provided that he shall not be called as a witness except on his own request in writing or his failure to give evidence shall be made the subject of any comment by any of the parties or the Special Court or give rise to any presumption against himself or any person charged together with him at the same proceeding.

(5)(a) The Special Court shall, while deciding the civil liability of a person shall follow its own procedure which is not inconsistent with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

438

(b) Every offence punishable under this Act shall be tried summarily.

(c) When a person is convicted of an offence of land grabbing attended by criminal force or show of force or by Criminal intimidation, and it appears to the Special Court that, by such force or show of force or intimidation, the land has been grabbed, the Special Court may if it thinks fit, order that possession of the same be restored after evicting by force, if necessary.

(6) Every case under sub-section (1) shall be disposed of finally by the Special Court, as far as possible, within a period of six months from the date of institution of the case before it.

(7) Every finding of the Special Court with regard to any alleged act of land grabbing shall be conclusive proof of the fact of land grabbing and of the persons who committed such land grabbing, and every judgment of the Special Court with regard to the determination of title and ownership to, or lawful possession of; any land grabbed shall be binding on all persons having interest in such land:

Provided that the Special Court shall, by notification specify the fact of taking cognizance of the case under this Act. Such notification shall state that any objection which may be received by the Special Court from any person including the custodian of evacuee property within the period specified therein shall be considered by it:

439

Provided further that where the custodian of evacuee property objects to the Special Court taking cognizance of the case, the Special Court shall not proceed further with the case in regard to such property:

Provided also that the Special Court shall cause a notice of taking cognizance of the case under the Act, served on any person known or believed to be interested in the land, after a summary enquiry to satisfy itself about the persons likely to be interested in the land.

(8) It shall be lawful for the Special Court to pass such order as it may deem fit to advance the cause of justice. It may award compensation in terms of money for wrongful possession of the land grabbed which shall not be less than the amount equivalent to the market value of the land grabbed as on the date of the order and profits accrued from the land payable by the land gabber to the owner of the grabbed land and may direct re- delivery of the grabbed land to its rightful owner. The amount of compensation and profits, so awarded and costs of re-delivery, if any, shall be recovered as an arrear of land revenue in case the Government is the owner, or as a decree of a Civil Court, in any case to be executed by the Special Court:

Provided that, the Special Court shall, before passing an order under this sub-section, give to the land grabber an opportunity of making his representation or of adducing evidence, if any, in this regard, and consider

440

every such representation and evidence.

(2) Every rule made under this section shall, immediately after it is made, be laid before each House of the State Legislature if it is in session and if it is not in session in the session immediately following, for a total period of fourteen days which may be comprised in one session, or in two successive sessions and if before the expiration of the session in which it is so laid or the session immediately following both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or in the annulment of the rule, the rule shall, from the date on which the modification or annulment is notified, have effect only in such modified form or shall stand annulled, as the case may be; so however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that rule.

441

(2) The Special Court may cause a public notice of the substance of such regulations for the information of the general public.

(3) Every regulation made under this section shall, immediately after it is made, be laid before such House of the Legislature of the Sate if it is in session, and if it is not in session in the session immediately following for a total period of fourteen days which may be comprised in one session or in two successive sessions and if before the expiration of the session in which it is so laid or the session immediately following the State Legislature agrees in making any modifications in the regulation or in the annulment of the regulation, the regulation shall, from the date on which the modification or annulment is notified, have effect only in such modified form or shall stand annulled, as the case may be; so however, that any such modification or

annulments shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that regulation.”

442