- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH WRIT PETITION NO. 7773 OF 2023 (GM-PP) BETWEEN: 1. L M PRABHA DAUGHTER OF LATE MUNIKAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, AT NO.19, TEJAS NILAYA, RMV 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560054. 2. DR. RANGANATH L.M. SON OF LATE MUNIKAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, AT NO.29, 1ST CROSS, KGE LAYOUT, RMV 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560094. 3. L.M. VISHWANATH SON OF LATE MUNIKAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, AT FLAT NO.2T-2, SITE NO.17/B, 1ST CROSS, 4TH CROSS, BHOOPASANDRA NEW LAYOUT, IDEAL NEST, RMV 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560094. 4. DEVAMMA WIFE OF LATE MUNIKAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, AT DOOR NO.1/1, OPP PUSHPANJALI THEATRE, DINNUR MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 R T NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560032. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJESH D M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DHQ PO, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. PARACHUTE REGIMENT TRAINING CENTRE (INDIAN ARMY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, UNION OF INDIA), J C NAGARA, BENGALURU-560006. 3. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER KARNATAKA CIRCLE, KAMARAJ ROAD, BENGALURU-560042. 4. THE ESTATE OFFICER STATION CELL, HEADQUARTERS KARNATAKA AND KERALA SUB AREA, CUBBON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADHUKAR M DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS OF THE CASE NO. 7224/PPE/PRTC/SVY.NO.1 MH/(06/2017) ON THE FILE OF THE R4 AND BE PLEASED TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.02.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH ORAL ORDER The present writ petition has been filed impugning the proceedings initiated under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1973 (for short referred to as 'Public Premises Act') by respondent No.2 on the file of the Estate Officer, Station Cell, Head quarters Karnataka and Kerala Sub Area, Cubbon Road, Bengaluru. 2. The claim petition filed under Section 4 of the Public Premises Act (Annexure-L) would disclose that the Ministry of Defence, Government of India claims to be the absolute owner of the land in Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village, measuring 3 acres 27 second guntas as per the register (i.e., Military Land Register). The MLR is the official record maintained at the Defence Estate Office. It is also stated that the aforesaid land was taken over from the Mysore Lancers Department of Mysore State Forces, that had legally acquired the whole land in Survey No.1, Matadahalli during 1912 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Consequently upon the merger of Mysore State Forces into the Indian Union under the provision of Article 295 of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 Constitution and Federal Finance Integration Scheme instituted during the merger of Part B Princely States, if the properties were handed over to Indian Army (Government of India) vide Board Proceedings held on 26.02.1955. The said site is close in proximity to Palace Ground. The Officer in-charge of Land Cell requested the Survey Department to conduct a survey of lands in Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village and fix the boundaries of the land owned by the Army in the said survey number. The survey was conducted in the presence of the officers of the Army and other concerned persons of the Revenue Department including the encroachers on 10.08.2010. In the survey, it was discovered that the petitioner, in this writ petition, had illegally encroached the schedule property in portion of Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village, which is the land of the Army. The 6 guntas of land out of total 3 acres 27 guntas is said to be encroached by the petitioner and the petitioner is in occupation of the said land unauthorisedly and illegally. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not encroached any land in Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village. He is the owner in possession of 2,430 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 Sq.ft. land in Survey No.54, which he has purchased under the sale deed dated 10.07.2006 from B.P.Sirinivasa Raju. When the petitioner is not in occupation and possession of the land in Survey No.1, the proceedings under the Public Premises Act against the petitioner are void. It is further submitted that the Estate Officer cannot decide the disputed question of facts involving the determination of rights and titles over the land. He, therefore, submits that the impugned proceedings pending before respondent No.4 are liable to be quashed. 3. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 4. In the complaint, the allegation against the petitioner is he encroached 6 guntas of land in Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village. However, the petitioner's case is that he has not encroach upon the land in Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village which is the Army land. It is the question which needs to be decided on the basis of the evidence lead by the parties and this Court in exercise of its jurisdictions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot decide the disputed questions of fact. The petitioner would be at liberty to place on - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 record the evidence regarding his land in Survey No.54 and if he has not encroached the land in Survey No.1, the proceedings may be dropped. But it cannot be said that the Defence Estate Officer/Estate Officer is not competent to decide the said issue. No question of ownership is involved in the present writ petition since the petitioner is not claiming ownership of Survey No.1 of Matadahalli Village. His claim is that he is in possession of the land which he has brought from Mr.B.P.Srinivasa Raju under the registered sale deed in Survey No.54. 5. In view thereof, I am of the view that this writ petition is not maintainable in as much as it cannot be said that the proceedings initiated by the Defence Estate Officer/Estate Officer under the provision of the Public Premises Act on the basis of the complaint filed as per Annexure-L are without jurisdiction. 6. Subject to the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to adduce all evidence in support of his contention that he is not in possession of any land in Survey No.1, Matadahalli Village, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47327 WP No. 7773 of 2023 which is the Army land. Needless to state, the Defence Estate Officer/Estate Officer shall consider all the evidence, which may be adduced before him to decide the issue. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17