IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

WRIT PETITION NO.25543 OF 2022 (GM-FOR)

BETWEEN:

1. GANGADHARA

S/O LAXMANA

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

OCC-AGRICULTURE

R/O MALALICHANNENHALLI VILLAGE

THARIKERE TALUK

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577228.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. HIREMATHAD MAHESHIAH RUDRAYYA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS SECRETARY

Digitally signed by DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND ECOLOGY

ARUNKUMAR M S

M S BUILDING

Location: HIGH

COURT OF DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

KARNATAKA

BENGALURU - 560 001.

2. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

CUM THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY

SHIVAMOGGA CIRCLE

SHIVAMOGGA-577204.

3. ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

CUM THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY

THARIKERE SUB DIVISION THARIKERE CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577228.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO THE ORDER DATED 13.10.2022 PASSED IN APPEAL 86/2019-20 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -M CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2019 PASSED IN ENQUIRY NO. SA.A.SAM.LAKKAVALLI. TA.U.VI.OTTUVARI.112/2019 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-K.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

1. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 13.10.2022 in Appeal No.86/2019-20 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure-M) and the order dated 07.09.2019 in Ottuvari case No.112/2019 passed by respondent No.3 (Annexure-K), against the petitioner.

2. Heard Sri. M.R. Hiremathad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, land to an extent of 3 acres each, in Sy.No.4 of Malali Channenahalli Village was granted in favour of one Siddappa, Krishnappa, Narasimhaiah and Laxmana and the saguvali chit has been issued in their favour. The petitioner has produced the grant order dated 23.07.1971 (Annexure-A). The petitioner has also produced the Grant Certificate dated 31.10.1972 issued to Krishnappa as per Annexure-C1. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, the revenue records stand in the name of Siddappa, Krishnappa, Narasimhaiah pursuant to the grant order vide Annexure-A. During the year 2018, the petitioner has purchased the land from the original grantee Krishnappa, as per Annexure-E. Therefore, it is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the respondent - authority should identify the land of the petitioner in view of the respondent - authority declaring forest land and that apart, it is contended that, both the respondent - authorities have failed to consider the fact that the revenue authorities have granted the land in question as per Annexure-A to the vendors of the petitioner, and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner placed reliance on the Judgment of the this Court in the case of 'UNNIKUTTI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS' in W.P.No.2082/2025 disposed of by this Court on 04.02.2025, and submitted that the impugned orders passed by the respondent - authorities are liable to be quashed.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent - State submitted by referring to the Government Notification dated 25.01.1909 (Annexure-R1), wherein the land in question has been identified as forest land and therefore, the respondent - authorities have no authority under law to grant the land in question in favour of the grantees and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful examination of the record of rights produced at Annexure-B and the Grant Certificate produced at Annexure-C1, wh