- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 23711 OF 2017 (GM-FOR) BETWEEN: GURU FREDDY’S NATURE AWAREMENSS AND ADVENTURE ACADEMY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SOMANAHALLI P.O., BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560 082. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SWAMINI MALA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT SOMANAHALLI P.O., BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560 082. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANATHKUMAR SHETTY K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE FOREST DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE SCHEDULE MENTIONED LANDS OR TO INTERFERE WITH THE POSSESSION OF THE PETITIONER SOCIETY OVER THE SCHEDULE MENTIONED LAND EITHER BY COMMITTING TRESPASS OR DISPOSSESSING THE PETITIONER SOCIETY FROM SCHEDULE MENTIONED LANDS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents not to change the nature of the lands mentioned in the Schedule, not to interfere with its possession by trespassing into the lands or dispossess it from the lands mentioned in the Schedule to the petition. The land mentioned in the schedule are five portions of Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village, Uttarahalli Hobli Bengaluru South Taluk. 2. The petitioner contends that it is a Society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 and its objects are inter alia (i) to educate people about - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 protection, preservation, conservation and improvement of environment; (ii) to educate and promote dissemination of knowledge among the youth about maintaining ecology and importance of nature awareness; and (iii) to educate people about the need to plant trees and raise nurseries etc. and to involve youth in the said activities. The petitioner contends that the petition schedule item No.1 properies measuring in all 10 Acres of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village belonged to Mr. Guru Freddy who had acquired them under three sale deeds dated 27.11.1979, 26.10.1983, 06.06.1989 and 03.10.2000 respectively. He established the petitioner - Society in the year 1990 and thereafter executed a Will bequeathing the properties detailed in item No.1 of the petition schedule in favour of his disciple – Ms.Swamini Mala, who is the present President of the petitioner. The said Mr.Guru Freddy died on 08.04.2006. Thus, the President succeeded to the properties purchased by Mr.Guru Freddy. The revenue records in respect of item No.1 of the petition schedule properties is transferred to the name of the President of the petitioner – Society. The property detailed in item No.2 of the petition schedule i.e. 08 acres of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 village was granted to the then Nataraja Gurukula Nature Awareness and Adventure Academy (henceforth referred to as ‘Nataraja Gurukula’ for brevity) by the State Government in terms of the Government Order bearing No.RD 151 LGB 92, Bengaluru on 09.02.2001 by way of a lease for a period of thirty years. The item No.3 of the petition schedule i.e 20 Hectares of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village was also granted to Nataraja Gurukula by the State Government in terms of the Government Order bearing No.FEE 19 FLL 2013, Bengaluru dated 05.01.2015 for a period of 10 years with effect from 16.05.2013 for protection and development, subject to certain conditions. The petitioner contends that it is in possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid land for 40 years and is using the said land for the purpose of the defined objects of the Society. The petitioner contends that respondent No.1 had issued a notification dated 26.12.1987 under Section 4 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (for short, ‘the Act, 1963’) proposing to declare the land comprised in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte Village as a Reserved Forest. The petitioner contends that the Assistant Conservator of Forests by an order dated 16.09.2017, ordered eviction of the petitioner from the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 aforesaid land. The petitioner has challenged the order in an Appeal. Petitioner claims that several criminal cases were filed against it including a case of cutting down sandalwood trees, which were tried and the petitioner was acquitted. The petitioner contends that the follow-up notification under Section 17 of the Act, 1963 is not issued. The petitioner contends that the respondents in the last week of May 2017, made a false claim that the lands in the possession of the petitioner are forest lands and therefore, they are entitled to enter the said lands and under the said pretext, officials of the respondents tried to forcibly enter the lands and dug large number of pits for the purpose of planting saplings. The petitioner approached this Court for a direction to the respondents not to change the nature of the lands mentioned in the petition schedule and not to interfere or trespass into the petition schedule properties which are in its possession. During the course of this petition, the petitioner claimed, that the Assistant Commissioner had initiated proceedings in Case No.LND/RA/3/23/2018-19 against 90 persons including the petitioner alleging encroachment and addressed a letter dated 18.06.2020 to the Deputy Conservator of Forests. The petitioner claims that after a survey was - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 conducted, the Assistant Commissioner of Forests passed an order dated 26.10.2021 upholding the claim of petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents having once delivered possession of the properties, cannot dispossess the petitioner without following the due process of law and that too without issuing the notification under Section 17 of the Act, 1963. He contends that the properties granted to the petitioner are now utilized for the lawful purposes of the petitioner-Society and therefore, allowing the respondents to high handedly dispossess or interfere or trespass into the petition schedule properties would amount to throwing a spanner into the good works undertaken by the petitioner. He, therefore, prays that a direction be issued to the respondents not to trespass or dispossess the petitioner from the lands in question. 4. The writ petition is opposed by the respondents who have filed a statement of objections contending that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the State of Karnataka v. I.S. Nirvane Gowda and Others [2007 (15) SCC 744], held “when the lands were included in reserve forest, the entries in the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 revenue records were of no consequence and further, mere saguvali chits did not confer any title on the suit lands. This apart, the Revenue Authorities were not competent to deal with the property which was the part of the reserved forest.” The respondents contend that the petitioner is trying to take advantage of the grants made in its favour. They contend that the particulars of the properties furnished in the sale deeds at Annexures ‘D’ and ‘D1’ to the petition are incorrect. It is also contended that the properties mentioned in item No.2 of the schedule mentioned in the writ petition were granted in favour of Nataraja Gurukula. It is stated that the said land was given to Nataraja Gurukula for a period not extending beyond 30 years subject to certain terms and conditions as prescribed under Rule 19 of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969. They contend that the petitioner has failed to abide by clause Nos.15(a), 15(b) and 15(c) and 15(d) which specifically deal with the ownership of sandalwood and its preservation and in case of failure to do so, liberty was reserved in favour of the respondents to cancel the lease and re-enter the land. It is contended that the petitioner instead of using the petition schedule lands for conducting training of adventure activities, is - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 cultivating crops and has constructed permanent structures and has thereby violated the terms and conditions of the lease. It is also contended that the petitioner has failed to produce any proof for having paid the annual lease amount to the State Government. Further, it is claimed that the properties mentioned as item No.3 in the schedule to the writ petition was granted in favour of Nataraja Gurukula for a period of 10 years. The petitioner - Society was supposed to protect and maintain the forest area for a period of 10 years with effect from 16.05.2013 subject to certain terms and conditions one of which mandated that the forest area should not be cleared of any existing vegetation. However, the petitioner in violation of the said condition had illegally felled growing sandal wood trees and a Forest offence Case No.39/2016-17 was registered against the petitioner for clearing 76 fully grown sandal wood trees in the said property. It is, therefore, contended that the petitioner is flouting the conditions imposed by the State Government. The agreement in favour of Nataraja Gurukula was sought to be reinvestigated by the Forest department. It is contended that the lands claimed by the petitioner lie within Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village which measures 218 Acres - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 24 guntas, which was declared as the area notified for Reserve Forest under Section 4 of the Act, 1963 vide notification of the State Government dated 26.12.1987. It is contended that once an area is declared by notification as reserved forest under Section 4 of the Act, 1963 rights over such lands are governed under Section 6 of the Act, 1963 which reads as follows: "6. Bar of accrual of forest rights.—(1) After the issue of a notification under section 4, no right shall be acquired in or over the land comprised in such notification, except by succession or under a grant or contract in writing made or entered into by or on behalf of the Government or some person in whom such right, or power to create such right, was vested when the notification was issued; and on such land no new house shall be built or plantation formed, no fresh clearings for cultivation or for any other purpose shall be made and no trees shall be cut for the purpose of trade or manufacture except as hereinafter provided. No patta or right of occupancy shall without the previous sanction of the State Government be granted, in respect of such land, and every patta or right of occupancy granted without such sanction shall be null and void. (2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit any act done under the written permission of the Forest Settlement Officer. (3) No civil court shall, between the dates of publication of the notification under section 4 and of the final - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 notification to be issued under section 17 entertain any suit to establish any right in or over any land or to the forest produce of any land included in the notification under section 4." 5. The respondents relied upon the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme court dated 29.11.1996 in Supreme Court Monitoring Committee v. Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority [(1997) 11 SCC 605] where the term ‘forest land’ was largely defined as extensive tract of land covered with trees and undergrowth. Copious reference is also made to the order dated 12.12.1996 of the Hon’ble Apex in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India and Others [AIR 1997 SC 1228] where the word ‘forest’ was attempted to be defined by including the area recorded as forest in the Government record irrespective of the ownership and all statutorily recognized forests, whether designated as reserved, protected or otherwise for the purpose of Section 2(i) of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. Reference is also made to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Maharashtra Land Development Corporation and others v. State of Maharashtra and Another [JT 2010 (12) SC 305], where - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 the Hon’ble Apex Court held “The land in question remains, in essence, a forest and the mere purported presence of a rocky area therein cannot change its character”. It is contended that the respondents have committed no offence in entering or interfering with the illegal possession of the forest land by the petitioner - Society and that all procedures as prescribed under law to dispossess the petitioner have been followed and the 10 acres of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village has been taken into possession of the Forest Department. It is also contended that the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, in terms of the order No.RD-409-LGB-2012 dated 21.07.2012 cancelled the earlier Government order bearing No.RD-402-LGB-1989 dated 22.01.1991 in which the State Government had granted 30 acres of land to the Department of Women and Child Development, Government of Karnataka in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village. Therefore, it is contended that the Writ petition does not survive in view of the decision taken by the State Government to cancel the land granted to the Department of Women and Child Development. It is contended that the petitioner is in illegal possession of 20 Acres 18 guntas - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 of forest land, out of which about 10 Acres of land has been taken possession of by the respondents and 1550 pits of suitable size have been dug and 1550 seedlings of various species including fruit yielding species have been planted by the Forest Department during 27.05.2017 to 03.06.2017. It is contended that the forest land was also surveyed by the High- Level Committee appointed by the Government of Karnataka vide Government Order No.FE.FEE 52FGL-2013 dated 26.10.2015 to verify the allegations into encroachments of forest lands in Bangalore Urban District in 2015. The High Level Committee has found that the petitioner has illegally occupied and encroached upon 02 Acres 19 guntas though the RTC shows that the petitioner is entitled to 01 Acre in block No.4. It is also claimed that the petitioner has illegally occupied 17 Acres 33 guntas of land as against the revenue records which show that the petitioner is entitled to 09 Acres in block No.11 of Sy. No.37. Therefore, it is alleged that the petitioner has encroached into 21 acres 12 guntas of land despite the fact that the sale deed was only for 10 acres in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village. Therefore, they contend that the claim of the petitioner is not maintainable. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the petitioner is in unlawful possession of area of land which it has been using it for various other purposes than for what it was allotted / granted. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. 8. The petitioner has been in possession of certain extents of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village as the owner thereof in terms of sale deeds which are produced as Annexures ‘D’, ‘D1’, ‘D2’ and ‘D3’ dated 27.11.1979, 26.10.1983, 06.06.1989 and 03.10.2000 in favour of Mr.Swamy Freddy /Mr. Guru Freddy. It also appears that the said Mr. Guru Freddy had executed a Will dated 05.01.2006 in favour of the President of the petitioner – Society, namely, Ms.Swamini Mala. It also appears that an extent of 08 acres of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte was granted to Nataraja Gurukala in terms of an order of the State Government bearing No.RD 151 LGB 92, Bengaluru dated 09.02.2001 vide Annexure - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 ‘H’ to the petition. This grant was for a period of 30 years and subject to certain conditions mentioned therein. Likewise, 20 hectares of land in Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village was granted to Nataraja Gurukala in terms of an order passed by the State Government bearing No.FEE 19 FLL 2013, Bengaluru dated 05.01.2015 for a period of 10 years with effect from 16.05.2023 for protection and development of forest which was again subject to certain conditions. It is not known whether the grant dated 05.01.2015 is extended from 16.05.2023. It is the case of the petitioner that the name of “Nataraja Gurukula Nature Awareness and Adventure Academy” is changed to “Guru Freddy’s Nature Awareness and Adventure Academy”. The land granted to Nataraja Gurukula is not seriously disputed by the respondents. If that be so, the possession of the petitioner cannot be disturbed and the respondents cannot trespass or enter upon the land for whatever purpose unless the respondents take necessary measures to either cancel the grant in the manner known to law or by issuing a notification under Section 17 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963. The petitioner is in lawful possession of the property granted to it, and subject to the outcome of the appeal filed by the petitioner - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32000 WP No. 23711 of 2017 against the order of the Assistant Conservator of Forests dated 16.09.2017, the respondents cannot take law into their hands to vandalize or interfere with the possession of the petitioner or trespass or dispossess the petitioner from the aforesaid land. In view of the same, this writ petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed not to enter into or dispossess or cause any acts of trespass over the land in question of the petitioner bearing Sy. No.37 of Sunkadakatte village, Uttarahalli hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, without the due process of law, as mentioned supra. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SMA/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29