- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2565 WP No. 31010 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 31010 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VANITHA KOTARI, W/O AMITH KOTARI, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. 2. SMT. AARTHI KOTARI, W/O ABHINANDAN KOTARI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/A HOUSE NO. 387, SHANTHI VILLA, 14TH "B" CROSS, 2ND PHASE, 2ND STAGE, WEST OF CORD ROAD, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 086. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SRIKANTH N V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560 001. 2. THE TAHASILDAR, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATHA K, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2565 WP No. 31010 of 2024 18.06.2024, 12.11.2024 AND 13.11.2024 BY THE PETITIONERS AS PER ANNEXURE-A, A1 AND B ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking directions against the respondents to consider petitioners' representation dated 18.06.2024, 12.11.2024 and 13.11.2024 at Annexure-A, A1 and B, wherein the petitioners are seeking exchange of lands held by them as against gomal land owned by the State which is adjoining the petitioner's converted land, alleging inaction this caption petition is filed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondents-State. 3. Upon a detailed examination of the records, this Court observes that the petitioners are the absolute owners of the land situated in Byadarahalli Village, Thyamagondlu Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, specifically covering Survey Numbers 97, 98, 99, 101, 102, 110 to - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2565 WP No. 31010 of 2024 115, and 125 to 130, along with 150 and 152. The aggregate measurement of these lands is 29 acres and 7 guntas. The petitioners have successfully secured conversion of these lands for industrial purposes, signifying their intention to utilize the said lands for industrial development. However, despite the conversion approval, the petitioners contend that they have been unable to proceed with the development as planned. Consequently, they have approached this Court with a request to exchange their converted lands with gomal lands owned by the State. The petitioners have expressed their willingness to relinquish their rights over the converted lands in favor of the State in exchange for the gomal lands sought. 4. This Court has consistently, through a series of judgments, underscored the importance of preserving gomal lands, which serve as grazing grounds and are critical for the sustenance of cattle populations and the rural economy. The responsibility to ensure the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2565 WP No. 31010 of 2024 conservation of these lands primarily rests with the Deputy Commissioner, who is obligated to undertake an inquiry to ascertain whether the divesting of gomal lands is justified. This inquiry must be comprehensive and consider factors such as the existing cattle population and the overall necessity for preserving such lands for public use. Furthermore, any decision to divest gomal lands must be made sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances, where public interest or legal mandate unequivocally justifies such action. 5. The mere inability of the petitioners to develop their converted lands does not, by itself, create a legal or equitable right for them to seek the exchange of their lands with gomal lands owned by the State. Gomal lands are expressly designated to serve the collective needs of the public, including providing grazing grounds essential for livestock. They cannot be subjected to exchange or alienation simply to accommodate the individual difficulties faced by private landowners. Public interest remains - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2565 WP No. 31010 of 2024 paramount in such matters, and any attempt to repurpose or reallocate gomal lands must be approached with caution and strictly within the bounds of law. 6. In light of the foregoing considerations, the petitioners have not succeeded in demonstrating a legal right or entitlement that would necessitate the intervention of this Court to grant the relief sought. Additionally, the respondents, given the present circumstances and the prevailing legal principles, are neither in a position to accede to the petitioners' representation nor to entertain their request for the exchange of gomal lands. Accordingly, the petitioners' claims do not merit further consideration, and their plea stands untenable in law. 7. The writ petition is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10