- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.25828 OF 2023 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: ACHARYA PATASHALA EDUCATIONAL TRUST (R) N.R. COLONY BENGALURU-560 004 BY ITS SECRETARY AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY PRAKASH ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS AANANTHACHAR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI H.N. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NAGESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU-560 009. 3. THE UNDER SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT LAND GRANT-1 M.S. BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH K., H.C.G.P.) Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A DATED 9.10.2023 NO.RD 280 LGB 2023 ISSUED BY R1 AS NON-EST AND VOID AB-INITIO AND DO NOT BIND THE PETITIONER AS THE SAME BEING ARBITRARY, CONTRARY TO THE DIRECTIONS IN W.A.NO.4059/2004 AT ANNEXURE-C DATED 17TH APRIL, 2009 AND ALSO IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the communication dated 09.10.2023 passed in RD.280 LGB 2023 issued by the Government of Karnataka inter-alia sought for a direction to the respondent- authorities to implement the report of the Deputy Commissioner dated 03.11.1999 vide Annexure-E. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that, on 03.05.1962, the then Government of Mysore was pleased to grant 90 acres of land in Sy.no.225 of Somanahalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk in favour of the petitioner-Trust which is about 35 kms. from the City Centre. It is also stated in the writ petition that, 57 acres has been permanently granted in favour of the Trust and the remaining 33 acres has been given on lease - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 on *03.05.1962 as per Annexure-E dated 03.11.1999 to the writ petition. It is also argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the order dated 17.04.2009 in W.A.No.4059/2004 (Annexure-C), that, the respondent- Government was directed to consider the recommendation made by the Deputy Commissioner for issuing permanent grant in respect of the entire extent of land in question. When such being the position, communication vide Annexure-A dated 09.10.2023 has been made by the respondent-Government proposing to allot 15 acres of land in 33 acres of land in Somanahalli Village to *the organisation as shown in Annexure- A. It is the case of the petitioner that, the respondent - authorities, without considering the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.4059/2004 dated 17.04.2009 (Annexure-C) has made the aforesaid communication, which is unjust and improper and therefore, sought to quash Annexure-A dated 09.10.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the report made by respondent no.2 to respondent no.1 dated 07.09.2020 (Annexure-L) wherein at item no.9, specific observation has been made in favour of the petitioner for permanent grant of land in question subject to certain *corrected vide Chambers Order dated 13.08.2025. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 restrictions. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, in respect of the subject land, if any allotment is made to any other Organization or any other person other than the petitioner, it will go contrary to the interest of the students of the petitioner's Institution and, accordingly, sought for interference by this Court. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP sought to justify the impugned order at Annexure-A and he further submitted that, Annexure-A is only an internal communication between the Government and the Deputy Commissioner and, therefore, sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. The learned HCGP submitted that, the petitioner herein is assailing Annexure-A without making the beneficiary of the land in question a party in the writ petition and accordingly sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that, as per Annexure-E dated 03.11.1999 is concerned, 90 acres of land has been leased in favour of the petitioner-Trust, out of which 57 acres is granted permanently in favour of the petitioner-Trust - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 and the remaining 33 acres is granted on a lease basis. It is also forthcoming from the averments of the writ petition that, the petitioner- Trust is running an Educational Institution with regard to the entire extent of 90 acres of land, which was earlier leased by the respondent-authorities. 8. I have also carefully considered the judgment dated 17.04.2009 passed by this Court in W.A.No.4059/2004 and also the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.28068/2004 dated 31.08.2004 wherein, the request made by the petitioner herein, seeking renewal of grant of land which has been rejected by respondent no.2 and the said rejection has been confirmed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. However the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.4059/2004, set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge and the operative portion of the order reads as under : "(a) The Writ petition is allowed. (b) The impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge as well as the Deputy Commissioner as per Annexure-G are hereby set aside. (c) The order granting the land to the 4th Respondent, which is in the possession of the appellant institution, for - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 which their request for renewal is pending is improper, illegal and therefore the same is also quashed. (d) The Government is directed to consider recommendation made by the Deputy Commissioner as par Annexure-E dated 3.11.1999 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. (e) It is made clear while considering the request of the appellant it is not proper for them to hear any other claimant. (1) No Costs." 9. On a careful consideration of the order passed by this Court in W.A.No.4059/2004, makes it clear that, the Government has to consider the request of the petitioner herein, before taking any action, insofar as allotting the subject land in favour of any other person/Organisation. 10. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the petitioner and the order dated 17.04.2009 in Writ Appeal, wherein this court has clearly directed the respondent- authorities to consider the recommendation made by the Deputy Commissioner. Therefore, if the order at Annexure-A is implemented, the same shall go against the order dated 17.04.2009 passed in the Writ Appeal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 11. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the report submitted by respondent no.2 to respondent no.1 at Annexure-L, the Respondent No.1 herein is directed to consider the renewal/claim made by the petitioner-Trust concerned in accordance with law, keeping in view the report dated 07.09.2020 Annexure-L and more particularly, the order passed by this Court in W.A.No.4059/2004 dated 17.04.2009 (Annexure-C), within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. However, it is also open for the respondent-State to identify a different land, if so advised, in respect of the Organisation for which Anneuxre-A has been passed and, allot the same in accordance with law, however the Government is forbidden from allotting the land bearing *Sy.No.225 to an extent of 33 acres of land in favour of any person/Organisation, which would run contrary to the order dated 17.04.2009 in the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, to that extent, Annexure-A requires to be quashed and, it is open for the respondent-authorities to allot any suitable land in favour of the said Organisation, other than the land mentioned in Annexure-A. *corrected vide Chambers Order dated 13.08.2025. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28317 WP No. 25828 of 2023 With the aforesaid observation, writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE rs List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64