The main legal point established in this judgment is that the petitioner failed to establish the existence of the Siddapura Lotus Pond on the disputed land and that the grants made to private individuals were valid under the relevant rules.

ORDER :

1. This Public Interest Litigation is filed seeking following reliefs:

“(a) To issue a writ, orders, directions or writs in the nature of mandamus or any other writ directing the respondent nos.1 to 3 to remove all the illegal encroachments on the land in Survey no. 7, measuring 0.22 guntas, in Siddapura village, which is known as “Siddapura Lotus Pond” and to fence the said land and take all steps required to protect it from any further encroachment and destruction.

(b) To direct the respondent nos. 1 to 4 to take necessary steps to restore the Siddapura Lotus Pond in survey no. 7, measuring 0.22 guntas, in Siddapura village to its original state and to revive the same as a water body within a fixed time frame.

(c) To set aside order dated 03.05.2012 bearing No. L and D (West)/CR, 140/10-11, issued by respondent no. 4, produced herein as Annexure-H, granting 0.04 guntas in Survey no. 7 as alternative land under Rule 28(A) of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules 1969 read with Rule 97(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 to land losers.

(d) To direct the respondent nos.1 to 4, to stop and remove all construction being carried out by respondent nos.6 and 7 of the commercial multi-storeyed complex in 0.04 guntas in Sy. no. 7, Siddapura, which is part of the Siddapura Lotus Pond, without any sanctioned plan or approval and to bring back the land to its original position, so that the Siddapura lotus pond may be revived.

(e) To set aside order dated 03.08.2022, bearing No. L and D (West)/CR-147/2017-18, issued by Respondent No. 4, marked as Annexure-Z, earmarking 0.02 guntas land in Survey No. 7 being the Siddapura Pond, as easement.

(g) To order an enquiry into the illegal grant and transfer of land in Sy. No. 7, Siddapura village being the “Siddapura Lotus pond” by an appropriate authority.”

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the subject land where the “Siddapura Lotus Pond” was earlier located was an important water body, portion of which has been illegally granted as alternate land under order dated 03.05.2012 issued by respondent No. 4, granting 0.04 guntas under Rule 28(A) of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969 read with Rule 97(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 to the land losers. The grantees of the said land have sold the same which is now acquired by respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in terms of deed of sale dated 16.08.2021. That the respondents 6 and 7 have been illegally putting up construction on the said land which is a part of said “Siddapura Lotus Pond.”

3. Smt. Jayna Kothari, learned Senior counsel appearing for the counsel for petitioner taking through the documents produced along with the writ petition submitted that:

(a) the google images produced for the period from 2003 till 2010 disclose the existence of the said pond.

(b) That in the revenue records namely RTC extract produced by the respondent at Annexure-R-2 for the year 1992-93, Col. No. 12 indicates that the 22 guntas of land in Sy. No. 7 is referred to as “Mufat Kaval Sarkari Kunte.”

(c) She also referred to copy of Akarband register extract produced Annexure-F to the writ petition wherein the said 22 guntas of land is shown as ‘B’ Kharab land.

(d) She also relied upon Rule 21(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 to submit that ‘B’ kharab land is an un-arable land reserved for public purpose and that the aforesaid revenue documents clearly reveal that the subject land is a tank, falling within the classification of ‘B’ kharab land reserved for public purpose. Thus, she submits that under the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act and Rules ‘B’ kharab land which is reserved for public purpose cannot be made a subject matter of a grant.

(e) Referring to a communication dated 21.05.2011 produced as Annexure-G wherein the Tahsildar has submitted the report and proposal before the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District proposing to grant 0.04 guntas of land in Sy. No. 7 to the land losers as alternate land under Rule 28(A) of the Karnat