- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10917-DB WP No. 30919 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 30919 OF 2018 (KLGP) BETWEEN: SRI. MUNI ANJANAPPA S/O LATE PILLAPPA HINDU AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/AT SY NO.56/1 YELLUPURA VILLAGE VEERAPURA POST KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLPURA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 203 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATISH R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT VISVEWSWARAIAH TOWERS BANGALORE-560 001 Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10917-DB WP No. 30919 of 2018 3. THE TAHSILDAR DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU-561 203. 4. SRI RAMAMURTHY GOWDA S/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA HINDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS NO.2, 8TH CROSS OBALAPPA LAYOUT PAPAREDDY PALYA NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560 072 …RESPONDENTS (BY Sri G.S.ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3, R4 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.9.2017 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION SPECIAL COURT (COURT HALL NO.2) KANDAYA BHAVANA, BANGALORE - 560 009 IN L.G.C.(P) NO. 468/2017 TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 4(3) OF KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AT ANNEX-J AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10917-DB WP No. 30919 of 2018 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K) In this writ petition, the petitioner assailed the cognizance Order dated 12.09.2017 passed by the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Court, Kandaya Bhavana, Bengaluru-560009 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Special Court') in L.G.C(P) No.468/2017 under Section 4(3) of Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. We have heard the learned Additional Government Advocate. 3. Albeit, sufficient opportunity was accorded to the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, he incessantly remained absent. The abridged facts of the case are as follows: 4. One Ramamurthy Gowda, filed a complaint before the Special Court against the Petitioner herein alleging that, the land bearing Sy.No.56/1, measuring 1 acre 34 guntas of Yellupura Village, Doddaballapura Taluk, Bengaluru Rural - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10917-DB WP No. 30919 of 2018 District belonging to the Mujrai Department was encroached by the petitioner. On receiving the said complaint the Special Court sought for a report from the Tahsildar, Doddaballapura Taluk to verify the veracity of the complaint. Accordingly, the Tahsildar submitted the report before the Special Court on 10.08.2017 along with documents. On assessing the report and documents, the Special Judge took cognizance of the case against the petitioner herein vide Order dated 12.09.2017 under Section 4(3) of the Act and directed the petitioner to appear before the Special Court. The said Order is challenged in this writ petition. 5. We have carefully perused the comprehensive materials placed before us. 6. It is gathered from the records that the Special Court took cognizance of the offence against the petitioner based on the report placed by the Tahsildar of Doddaballapura, stating that as per Taluk survey sketch and report, the petitioner illegally encroached 1 acre 34 guntas of land bearing Sy.No.56/1 at Yellupura Village of Daddaballpura Taluk. The veracity of the report and the complaint were collectively tested - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10917-DB WP No. 30919 of 2018 in detailed proceedings before the Special Court. Nevertheless, the petitioner has failed to place any such prima facie documents to establish that he has not illegally encroached the land as stated in the report filed by the Tahsildar. In that view of the matter, we find no error in the cognizance Order taken by the learned Special Court. Accordingly, this writ petition lacks merits and the same is hereby dismissed. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to direct the Special Court to dispose the proceedings expeditiously within an outer-limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Order. 8. All the contentions are left open. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE RAK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14