1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

AND

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

WRIT PETITION No.7867 OF 2020 (KLGP)

BETWEEN:

H.B.PARVATH REDDY

S/O.LATE H.BHIMANNA

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.81, TERU BEDI

BASAVESHWARA NAGAR

RAMPURA VILLAGE, DEVA SAMUDRA

MOLAKALMURU TALUK

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT -577 540

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI K.RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

M.S.BUILDING

BENGALURU 3 560 001

REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHITRADURGA 3 577 701

3.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

CHITRADURGA SUB-DIVISION

CHITRADURGA 3 577 701

2

4.

THE TAHSILDAR

MOLAKALMUR

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 3 577 701 &. RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI P.B.ACHAPPA, AGA)

*****

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE

KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT,

BENGALURU IN L.G.C.(G) NO.1987/2018 INITATED ON THE

BASIS OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 DATED

12.09.2018 (ANNEXURE-G1) AND THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE

KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT,

BENGALURU DATED 26.06.2020 IN L.G.C.(G) NO.1987/2018

(ANNEXURE-G) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the

constitutional validity of the Karnataka Land Grabbing

Prohibition Act, 2011 (Karnataka Act 38 of 2014). Prayers

as sought for by the petitioner are as under:

"(a) Declare that Karnataka Act No.38 of 2014

is ulta virus the Constitution of India, the

substantial provisions being voilative of Article

14, Article 20, Article 21 and Article 300A of

the Constitution of India.

3

(b) Declare that Section 9(1) with reference to

conferring the jurisdictional on Special Court

under the Act on an application made by any

person is voilative of Article 14 of the

Constitution of India and also Section 4(3) and

Section 9(5)(b) of the Karnataka Act No.38 of

2014 are voilative of Articles 20 and 21 of the

Constitution of India.

(c) issue a writ of certiorari or any other

appropriate writ, order or direction quashing

the impugned proceedings pending on the file

of the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition

Special Court, Bengaluru, Karnataka in L.G.C

(G) No.1987/2018 initiated on the basis of the

complaint filed by Respondent No.4 dated

12.09.2018 found at Annexure-G1 and the

impugned notice issued by the Karnataka Land

Grabbing Prohibition Special Court, Bengaluru,

Karnataka dated 26.02.2020 in L.G.C (G)

No.1987/2018 found at Annexure-G and allow

this writ petition with costs and grant such

other reliefs as this Hon9ble Court deems fit to

grant in the circumstances of the case, in the

interest of justice and equity.=

4

2. Sri K.Raghavendra Rao, learned counsel appearing

for petitioner would fairly submit that in view of the law

declared

by

this

Court

in

WP.No.47747/2017

and

connected matters disposed of on 19.01.2021, his prayer

sought for in the writ petition would not survive for

consideration. However, he would hasten to add that while

disposing of this writ petition, directions issued by this

Court in the aforesaid writ petitions may be applied to the

case on hand and jurisdictional Court may be directed to

consider the claim of petitioner in the light of direction

given in WP.No.47747/2017 on 19.1.2021 at paragraph-

175(x).

3. Having heard Sri K.Raghavendra Rao, learned

counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri P.B.Achappa,

learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for

respondents who is on advance notice, we notice that

grounds urged in the writ petition are disputed question of

fact, which cannot be gone into by this Court under Articles

226 and 227