The absence of a defined selection process for judicial appointments undermines fairness and violates constitutional rights to equality and transparency in public employment.

ORDER :

ASHOK S. KINAGI, J.

1. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking following prayer:

"To issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ/s directing the respondents to frame appropriate regulations or guidelines for the selection and appointment to the posts of Chairperson, Judicial Member And Revenue Member of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Courts, Bengaluru."

2. The brief facts leading rise to filing of this writ petition are as follow:

3. The petitioner is challenging the arbitrary and non- transparent selection process adopted by the State of Karnataka for appointment to the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Court, Bengaluru. The petitioner, a retired District Judge seeks a direction to the respondents to frame appropriate regulations or guidelines for selection and appointments to the post of Chairperson, Judicial Member, and Revenue Member of the said Special Court. The petitioner retired as a second Additional District Concession Judge in March 2023 after an unblemished service record. Following vacancies in the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Code, the Government of Karnataka issued Public Notices on 16.07.2025. Calling for application to the post of chairman, judicial member and revenue member. The petitioner duly applied for the post of judicial member on 08.08.2025.

4. The KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT , 2011 under Section 7 establishes the Special Court, with a chairman, two judicial members, and two revenue members. The Act only prescribes minimum qualifications. The chairman must be a sitting or retired High Court Judge, the judicial member must be a sitting or retired District Judge, and the revenue members must hold or have held a post not below the rank of Deputy Commissioner. Neither KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT nor the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Court (Conditions of Service of the Chairman and Members) Rules, 2017 prescribes any selection procedure or criteria beyond these basic qualifications. It is contented that complete absence of a selection procedure or criteria renders the entire process arbitrary, unfair and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The lack of transparency in selection and appointment to a judicial post undermines the rule of law. And is contrary to the settled principles established by the Hon'ble Apex Court and the High Court of Karnataka. Hence, the petition is filed seeking direction to the respondents to frame the appropriate regulations or guidelines for selection and appointment to the post in the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Courts.

5. The State filed a statement of objections containing that The wit petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable either under law or on facts. It is contented that respondent no. 2 is a special court constituted under Section 7 of the KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT , 2011 for the purpose of providing speedy enquiry into any alleged act of land grabbing and for the trial of cases relating to ownership, title or lawful possession of land alleged to have been grabbed without a valid or lawful title and those offences specified in Chapter XIV-A of the Land Revenue Act, 1964. As per