- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3903 WP No. 55687 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 55687 OF 2017 (GM-PP) BETWEEN: THE BOARD OF TRUST & MUSLIM, ENDOWMENTS,) (WAKF) JAMIA, MASJID ADMINISTRATION, JAMIA MASJID ROAD, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 101. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. S.R.ANURADHA., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SABAHATH SULTANA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. 1(a) SMT N.M.KAMALAMMA D/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, SINCE DECEASED BY LR'S, MR. HARINAKSHI D/O LATE N.M.KAMALAMMA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 1(b) MR. ANANDA S/O LATE N.M.KAMALAMMA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 1(c) MR. LINGAMURTHY S/O LATE N.M.KAMALAMMA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 1(d) MR. RENUKASWAMY S/O LATE N.M.KAMALAMMA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3903 WP No. 55687 of 2017 1(e) MR. CHANDRAPPA H/O LATE N.M.KAMALAMMA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 2. MR. N.M.SHANKARAMURTHY S/O LATE MAHADEVIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 3. MRS. N.M.HEMAVATHI S/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, 4. MRS. N.M.DHAKSHAYANI S/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 5. MR. N.M.MALLIKARJUNA S/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 6. MR. N.M.HAREESH S/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 7. SRI. N.M.LINGASWAMY S/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 8. MRS. N.M.LOKESHWARI D/O LATE MAHADEVIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 9. MRS. N.M.BHAGYA D/O LATE MAHADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 10. MR. N.M.DIVAKARA S/O LATE MAHADEVIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3903 WP No. 55687 of 2017 ALL ARE HOUSEWIVES AND AGRICULUTURISTS AND R/O NELLUR VILLAGE, KASABHA HOBLI, CHIKMAGALURU TALUK-577 101. 11. MRS. NIRMALA P.SHETTY, W/O PADMANABHA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, R/O BASAVANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, CHIKMAGALURU CITY-577 101. 12. THE COMPETENT OFFICER & ADDL. CEO KARNATAKA STATE BOARD OF WAKFS, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.C.JAYAKIRTHI., ADVOCATE FOR R11 SMT. SWATHI ASHOK., ADVOCATE FOR R12; R1(b-e), R2 TO 10-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt.S.R.Anuradha., Senior counsel on behalf of Sri.Sabahath Sultana., for the petitioner has appeared in person. Notice to the respondents was ordered on 12.12.2017. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondents 1 to 10 are - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3903 WP No. 55687 of 2017 served and unrepresented. They have neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the Judgment dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Prl. District Judge, Chikkmagalur in M.A.No.04/2017 vide Annexure-A and the order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Prl. District Judge, Chikkmagalur in M.A.No.04/2017 signed on 13.11.2017 vide Annexure-A1. 3. Senior counsel for the petitioner has urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. The original proceedings before the Competent Authority under Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1974 was initiated against one Smt.Nirmala P.Shetty and an order of eviction was passed on 24.09.2010 in respect of a property in Shop No.MA, 3901 (new 6793) Bada Makan, Chickmagalur. Respondents 1 to 10 herein assailed the order dated 24.09.2010 before the Prl. District Judge, Chikkamagaluru in M.A.No.04/2017. The District Judge - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3903 WP No. 55687 of 2017 vide Judgment dated 30.10.2017 set-aside the order of eviction and remitted the matter to consider the claim made by third parties. Suffice it to note that respondents 1 to 10 who are the appellants before the District Court, were not parties to the original proceedings. Moreover, the eviction order was passed against one Smt.Nirmala P.Shetty. She has accepted the order of eviction and has not questioned the same. The respondents 1 to 10 have no locus to question the order of eviction. Furthermore, they did not seek permission to prosecute the appeal before the District Judge. The District Judge has overlooked these aspects of the matter and has erroneously entertained the appeal. This is unsustainable in law. Therefore, the order passed by the District Judge is liable to be set-aside and so, it is set-aside. 5. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The Judgment dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Prl. District Judge, Chikkmagalur in M.A.No.04/2017 vide Annexure-A and the order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Prl. District Judge, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3903 WP No. 55687 of 2017 Chikkmagalur in M.A.No.04/2017 signed on 13.11.2017 vide Annexure-A1. 6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 20