W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.6278 OF 2018 (KLR-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.9115 OF 2018 (EDN-RES)
IN W.P.No.6278 of 2018 BETWEEN:
KEERTHI KUMAR, S/O ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O HITTINAGIRANI DODDAMANE, HOSAJOGA VILLAGE, HONNALLI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577 217. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.RAJA SUBRAMANYA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G.LAKSHMEESH RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE DEPT., OF EDUCATION, VEEDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 2
3. THE TAHASILDAR, HONNALI TALUK, HONNALLI – 577 217. DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, HONNALI TALUK, HONNALLI – 577 217. DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
5. SANTHA SEVALAL DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT BOARD, SURYANAKUNDANAKUPPA, CHINNIKATTE POST, HONNALI TALUK – 577 217. DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
6. THE PRINCIPAL, MUNICIPAL HIGH SCHOOL, NYAMATHI, NYAMATHI – 577 223, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. Y.D.HARSHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4. SRI. SRIDHAR PRABHU, ADVOCATE FOR R-5. SRI M.V.MAHESHWARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND RETURN THE SCHEDULE LANDS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND HIS FAMILY MEMBER AS PER THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 09.11.2006 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.
***** W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 3
IN W.P.No.9115 of 2018
BETWEEN:
1. THE PRESIDENT, SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT MANAGING COMMITTEE, (SDM), GOVT. PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, NYAMATHI, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI. N.VIJENDRA.
2. THE VICE-PRESIDENT/SECRETARY, SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT MANAGING COMMITTEE, (SDM), GOVT. PRE-UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, NYAMATHI, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS VICE-PRESIDENT, SRI. SAHADEVAPPA REDDY. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.M.V.MAHESHWARAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE PRL. REVENUE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PRIMARY & HIGHER EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 4
4. THE COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION, NRUTATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.
5. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.
6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE – 576 201.
7. THE MEMBER SECRETARY, SANTHA SEVA LAL, KSHETRA DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (REG.) VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. … RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. Y.D.HARSHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R6. SRI. SRIDHAR PRABHU, ADVOCATE FOR R-7)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE EDUCATION AND OPERATION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. ED. 591 SES 2107, BENGALURU, DATED 01.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-3 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E AND ETC. *****
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP AND HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 23.11.2020, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: : W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 5
ORDER
WP NO.6278/2018
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking for a
writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.2 to
consider the representation (Annexure–A) of the
petitioner and return the schedule lands in favour
of the petitioner and his family members as per the
Government Order dated 09.11.2006 vide
Annexure–B; and has also sought a writ in the
nature of prohibition to the respondent Nos. 1 to 4
by prohibiting them from transferring the schedule
lands to the 5 th respondent- Santha Sevalal
Development and Management Board (for short,
SSDM Board).
2. The petitioner,
2.1. claims to be the son of late J.R. Eshwarappa,
who was the absolute owner of the schedule W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 6
land measuring 15 acres 11 guntas in
Sy.Nos.219 & 220 Chinnikatte Village,
Belagutti Hobli, Nyamathi Village, Honnali
Taluk, Davangere District.
2.2. The said Eshwarappa, in order to contribute
to the educational needs of Nyamathi
Village, gifted the schedule lands for the
benefit of Municipal High School, Nyamathi,
in the year 1950 to the Mysore State under
the Bhoodan and Vidyadan for Educational
Institutions Scheme. Accordingly, the
revenue entries were effected in the name of
Municipal High School, Nyamathi.
2.3. The petitioner contends that the said land
was not used by the Municipal High School,
Nyamathi and physical possession is
continued with the petitioner and members
of their family. He contends that the said W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 7
land is a dry land with only few eucalyptus
plants planted by the petitioner and since
the land was not utilized for the purposes for
which it was gifted, relying on the
Government Order No. RD (Spl.) 121 PCT 79
dated 21.03.1980, had applied for returning
the gifted lands.
2.4. It is contended that as per the said
Government Order if a land which gifted
under Bhoodan and Vidyadan for Educational
Institutions Scheme is not used for the
purposes for which it was given, then a
application for the return of the gifted lands
to the land owners can be made if the land
owners were inclined to take back the gifted
land/s from the Government by obtaining
appropriate orders from the Deputy
Commissioner, subject to the condition that W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 8
the landowners undertake to give two
quintals of rice annually to the concerned
Educational Institution for the purpose for
which the lands were granted.
2.5. The petitioner was not aware of the said
Government Order and he came to know
about the same during the first week of
January 2008. After making enquiries, he
collected the Government Order, made a
representation to the Deputy Commissioner
seeking return of the gifted land. The
grievance of the petitioner is that the said
representation was not considered by the
authority and contrary to the representation,
the authorities have sought to transfer the
land to Respondent No.5-SSDM Board,
without considering the representation of the
petitioner. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 9
3. Respondent No.5-SSDM Board in WP 6278/2018
has filed objections, contending that,
3.1. The petition is not maintainable;
3.2. The land which had earlier been donated
for Education Scheme, is now proposed to
be used for SSDM Board, which is an
organization established by the
Government by creation of a Trust in the
name of Santh Sevalal, a social reformer
and religious leader of nomadic, semi-
nomadic tribes who hailed from in and
around Nyamathi.
3.3. The 5 th respondent-Trust has been created
in pursuance of the Government Order and
its administration is headed by the Hon’ble
Chief Minister of Karnataka and apart from
Hon’ble Chief Minister, the Administrative W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 10
Body consists of Secretaries of various
Departments as also the Government
officials, who will manage the Trust to
accomplish its objects.
3.4. It is stated that the claim of the petitioner
that, ‘the land has not been utilized for the
school’ is entirely false, the land has been
used for the School as also for various
other activities by the Government.
3.5. Apart there from it is stated that, the
alleged Government Order dated
21.03.1980 is false and fabricated and the
Government has subsequently issued a
notification dated 12.07.2007 placing the
said facts and bringing it to the notice of
the general public and warning the general
public not to act on the said Government
Order, which is a fabricated one. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 11
3.6. In view of the same, it is submitted that,
on the basis of the fake Government Order
dated 21.03.1989, the petitioner cannot
claim any consideration by a writ of
mandamus and/or for return of the land on
the ground that the land has not been
used.
WP NO.9115/2018
4. This petition has been filed by the President and
Vice President/Secretary of the School
Development Managing Committee (SDM),
Government Pre-University College, Nyamathi,
Honnali Taluk, and Davangere District. In the
said petition, the petitioner has sought to set
aside the execution and operation of the
impugned order bearing No.ED 591 SES 2107,
Bengaluru, dated 01.02.2018, by virtue of
which, it is directed to transfer the lands to W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 12
Santa Sevalal Development and Management
Committee. In the said petition, the President
and the Vice President contend that,
4.1. The property covered under Sy Nos. 219
and 220 of Chinnikatte Village, Honnali
Taluk, Davangere District, measuring
totally 15 acres 11 guntas had been
donated by one J.R. Eshwarappa to
Nyamathi Municipal High School, Honnali
Taluk, Davangere District on 28.06.1956
as per Bhoodan and Vidyadan for
Educational Institutions Scheme.
4.2. Since then the said lands were used by the
School and katha and pahani also stand in
the name of Municipal High School,
Nyamathi, which has now been upgraded
to Pre-university College and the entire W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 13
land has been put to use of the said
school/college.
4.3. It is further contended that, though there is
no construction put-up on the land, the
School has planted eucalyptus trees and a
portion of the land has been used for the
purpose of growing rice/paddy and jawar,
which used to be sold and the proceeds
there from were used for the purpose of
school/Pre-university College.
4.4. It is further stated that the portion of the
said land is used by the School as a play
ground for sports activities, which are
conducted in the said land.
4.5. On these grounds, it is stated that, the land
being vested with the School, ought not to
be divested and transferred to SSDM W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 14
Committee, as the transfer would prejudice
the interest of the petitioner.
5. Similar objections to that filed in WP
No.6278/2018 have been filed in WP Nos.9115
and 11035/2018 by the Member Secretary of
SSDM Committee by way of an Interlocutory
Application seeking for vacating the interim
order. In the said application it is stated that,
5.1. The Trust has been established for the
purpose of creating infrastructure in
Nyamathi.
5.2. There is sanction of a sum of Rs.34.00
lakhs for the purposes of establishment of
10 bedded Ayush hospital apart there from,
the Trust has already been running a
Training Institute and the same requires W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 15
more space and that can be established in
the subject land.
6. Sri. Raja Subramanya Bhat, learned counsel
instructed by Sri.G. Lakshmeesh Rao, learned
counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contents
of the writ petition and also submitted that the
Government Order dated 21.03.1980 was also
widely reported in newspaper in the year 1980.
Therefore, the counsel for the petitioner relying
upon the above statement made in the
newspaper submits that, the representation
made by the petitioner is required to be
considered by the authorities and the land be
returned to the petitioner, who is a descendant
of the donor.
7. Sri.M.V.Maheshwarappa, learned counsel for the
petitioner in W.P. No. 9115/2018 submitted that
the School has put the land to use, he reiterated W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 16
the contentions taken up in the petition and
further submitted that once the School has made
use of the land, it was not open for the
Government to transfer the said land to SSDM
Board, the School has a vested right over the
said land, the School is making use of the sale
proceeds from the sale of rice and jowar grown
on the said land for the purposes of running of
the School, if the land is transferred to SSDM the
School will lose its right and also the revenue
that it is earning from the said land, thus
adversely affecting the running of the School.
8. On the basis of the above, he submits that the
School not having been heard and the interest of
the School not having been considered by the
Government before passing of the impugned W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 17
order dated 1.2.2018 the said order is required
to be set aside.
9. Sri. Y.D. Harsha, learned Addl. Government
Advocate appearing for the respondent-State as
regards W.P. No.6278/2018 submits that,
9.1. The alleged Government Order dated
21.03.1980 is fabricated and fake, the
Government has already informed every one
concerned not to act on the said notification
and even it it were to be held to be issued, the
said notification is contrary to the Karnataka
Land Revenue Act, 1954.
9.2. That the petitioner cannot gain any benefit
from the said notification and hence,
consideration of the representation made by
the petitioner would not arise, since the same
is redundant and would not serve any practical
purpose and seeks for dismissal of the petition. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 18
10. In respect of WP No.9115/2018, Sri. Y.D. Harsha
submits that,-
10.1. The petitioners being the President and Vice
President of the School Development
Committee, which is a Government
Organization consisting of Government Officials
is not authorized to file the present petition
since no such authorization has been
produced.
10.2. The School Development Committee being an
organization, established by the Government
for the purpose of development of the School,
cannot challenge a Government Order issued
by the Government, since that would lead to a
chaotic situation and cannot be encouraged.
10.3. The school development Committee cannot
challenge the Government Order issued by the
Government. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 19
10.4. On the basis of above grounds, he seeks for
dismissal of the writ petitions.
11. Sri. Sridhar Prabhu, learned counsel appearing for
Respondent No.5-SSDM Board in WP No.6278/2018
and for Respondent No.7 in WP No.9115/2018
submits that,
11.1. The said Trust has been created by a
notification bearing No.SaKaE 336 SDC 2015
dated 06.01.2017.
11.2. The governing body of the Trust in its meeting
held on 18.07.2017, deliberated on a number
of welfare measures and decided that a Skill
Development and Training Institute should be
established under the Aegis of the State
Government through Respondent No.7-Trust.
11.3. The Governing Body wrote a letter to the
Principal Secretary to Government of
Karnataka, Department of Labour, on W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 20
07.08.2018 requesting for a direction to the
concerned authorities to start a Skill
Development and Industrial Training Institute.
11.4. It is in pursuance thereof the Executive
Director, Karnataka Residential Educational
Institutions Society wrote to the Principal
Secretary, Social Welfare Department, seeking
approval for establishment of the residential
School for students of Scheduled Caste in
Sooragondanakoppa.
11.5. Respondent No.7 in its meeting held on
18.07.2017 has decided to establish Ayurvedic
Medical Care and Welfare Center for the
welfare of the people.
11.6. In that regard, the Director of AYUSH,
Government of Karnataka wrote a letter to the
Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Health and Family Welfare, Government of W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 21
Karnataka to grant approval for establishment
of 10 beds Government Ayurvedic Hospital.
11.7. He submits that, there is enough and more
action taken by the Trust to make use of the
land, which cannot be disputed and/or
controverted by the petitioners.
11.8. The petitioners are coming in the way of the
proper implementation of the plans of
development, which cannot be countenanced.
11.9. He further submits that Boodan Yagna Act
stands repealed by the Karnataka Boodan
Yagna (Repeal) Act, 1962 by referring to
Section-4 thereof; he submits that there can
be no action taken under the said Act, which is
repealed. Therefore, even though the
applications were to be made, the said land
cannot be returned to the petitioner in WP
No.6278/2018, as claimed or otherwise. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 22
11.10. The petitioners in WP 9115/2018 do not have
any locus to challenge the Government Order
which has been issued to the School to transfer
the land to SSDM Board.
11.11. The School Development Committee
represented by the President or Vice President
in their individual capacity filing the above writ
petition without any authorization does not
arise.
11.12. School Development Committee cannot
challenge the order of the Government.
11.13. On the basis of the above grounds, he submits
that both the writ petitions are to be dismissed.
12. Heard Sri. Raja Subramanya Bhat for
Sri.G.Lakshmeesh Rao for the petitioner in
W.P.NO. 6278/2018, Sri.M.V.Maheshwarappa, W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 23
learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P. No.
9115/2018 Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned AGA for the
State in both the petitions, Sri Sridhar Prabhu,
learned Advocate for Sevalal Development and
Management Board in both the petitions.
13. On the basis of the pleadings filed as also on the
basis of the averments made, the questions that
would arise for consideration of this Court are:
13.1. Whether once a land has been gifted under Bhoodan and Vidyadan Scheme, could the land owner and/or legal representatives of the land owner seek for return of the said land on the ground that the land has not been put to use for the purpose for which the land was gifted, by relying on the Government Order No.RD (Spl) 121 ECT 79 dated 21.3.1980?
13.2. Whether the School development Committee or its office bearers can challenge the Govt. Order directing transference of the land vested with the School to the Santh Sevalal Development and Management committee?
13.3. What Order? W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 24
14. I answer the above questions as under:
15. ANSWER TO POINT NO.1: Whether once a land has been gifted under Bhoodan and Vidyadan Scheme, could the land owner and/or legal representatives of the land owner seek for return of the said land on the ground that the land has not been put to use for the purpose for which the land was gifted, by relying on the Government Order No.RD (Spl) 121 ECT 79 dated 21.3.1980?
15.1. The contention of the petitioner in WP
6278/2018 in the petition as also during
the course of submissions made by
Sri. Raja Subramanya Bhat learned counsel
for the petitioner is that the land had been
donated by late J.R. Eshwarappa for the
purposes of running of the School in the
year 1950. However, the said land was not
put to use, therefore the very purpose of
donation of the land having been rendered
redundant and/or the land not being put to
use for the purposes for which it was W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 25
donated, the land is required to be
returned to the donor and/or his legal
representatives in terms of the
Government Order dated 21.3.1980.
15.2. Per contra, the submissions made by the
M.V.Maheshwarappa, learned counsel for
the petitioner in WP No. 9115/2018 is that
the School and now the college has been
making use of the said land for its
purposes, inasmuch as it is used for
organizing sports activities, other cultural
activities, it is the School who has planted
eucalyptus trees, that the School is also
planting and growing rice, jowar and
vegetables in the said land, which is sold in
the market, the proceeds therefor being
used for the purpose of the School. W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 26
15.3. Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned AGA appearing for
the state submitted that the very
notification on which basis the said claim is
made dated 21.3.1980 is a false, fabricated
and manipulated document and as such,
the State has issued a notification on
12.7.2007 immediately on the State
coming to know of the said fabricated
notification on which basis similar
applications had been filed that the
notification dated 21.3.1980 is fabricated
and neither the public nor the government
officers should give credence to the said
notification and/or act on the said
notification dated 21.3.1980.
15.4. Even otherwise, he submitted that the land
being put to use for the School as
contended by Sri.M.V.Maheshwarappa, W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 27
learned counsel for the petitioners in WP
9115/201. Therefore, he submits that
even if the notification dated 21.3.1980 is
proper and correct, the land having been
put to use for the School there is no right
vested with the petitioners to make use of
the said land.
15.5. Alternatively he submitted that whether the
land has been put to use for the School or
not, there is no vested right which has
been created in favour of the donor and/or
the legal representatives of the donor to
seek for return of the land.
15.6. The sole basis of the contention of the
petitioner in W.P.No.6278/2018 is that he
is the legal representative of one
Sri.J.R.Ishwarappa who had gifted the land W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 28
in Sy.No.219 and 220 of Chinnikatte Village,
Belagutti Hobli, Nyamathi Village, Honnali
Taluk, Davangere District to Municipal
School, Nyamathi under Bhoodan and
Vidyadan Scheme for education institution
Scheme. It is contended that the said land
has not been put to use by the said
Municipal School and therefore, the land
lying waste ought to be returned to the
petitioner. In this regard, he has relied
upon the Govt. Order No. RD (Spl.) 121 PCT
79 dated 21.3.1980.
15.7. In W.P.No.9115/2018 filed by the President
and Vice President of the School
Development Management Committee, it is
contended that the land has already been
put to use, the land is used as a
playground, certain agricultural produce W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 29
are grown on the said land, the sale
proceeds of agricultural produce are
transferred to the School for the purpose of
usage of the School for its developmental
activities and further contended that the
land having been put to use by the School
and now a pre-university college, the land
is required and cannot be transferred to the
Santh Sevalal Trust.
15.8. The contention in both the petitions are
diametrically opposed to each other. The
petitioner in W.P.No.6278/2018 contends
that land has not been put to use, whereas
petitioners in W.P.No.9115/2018 contend
that the land has been put to use. This
contradiction has been brought out due to
the glaring nature thereof, however, the
same has no relevance to the decision to W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 30
be rendered by this Court for the reason
that the same would rest on the
genuineness or otherwise of the Govt.
Order dated 21.03.1980 .
15.9. Sri.Y.D.Hasha, learned AGA appearing for
the State has categorically contended that
there is no such Govt. Order dated
21.3.1980 and in fact there is a Govt.
Order subsequently issued on 07.12.2007
categorically stating that no Government
department should rely on the alleged
Govt. order dated 21.3.1980 which is a
false and fabricated order. By way
notification dated 7.12.2007 the
Government has considered the
implications of such a false and fabricated
document and has fore-warned all the W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 31
concerned departments not to act on the
said Govt. Order dated 21.3.1980.
15.10. The notification dated 21.3.1980 also does
not make any sense inasmuch as the two
criteria prescribed under the alleged false
notification; one that the land is not used
for the purpose for which it is donated; two
that if the owner wants to resume the land
he has to donate 2 quintals of rice every
year to the School for the purpose of
resumption of the land. Such a condition is
unheard of and completely lacks bonafides.
It gives credence to the submission made
by Sri.Y.D.Harsha that there is no such
notification or a Government order dated
21.3.1980. Be that as it may, the
notification dated 12.7.2007 issued by the
Government makes it clear that the W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 32
notification dated 21.3.1980 is a false and
fabricated one.
15.11. What has been produced by the petitioner
in W.P.No.6278/2018 is a photocopy of the
said Govt. Order, the alleged Govt. Order
has not been gazetted nor the gazette
publication been produced. On enquiry,
learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that he does not have the
gazetted copy of the said order.
15.12. In view of the said submission and in the
light of the said notification dated
12.07.2007 which makes it clear that the
alleged Govt. Order dated 21.3.1980 is
false and fabricated, the question of the
petitioner in W.P.No.6278/2018 relying on W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 33
the said fabricated Govt. Order would not
arise.
15.13. If that be so, the contention as regards
whether the land is put to use or not put to
use becomes irrelevant for the reason that
the same has no basis for the claim put
forward by the Petitioner in W.P No. 6278
of 2018 for return of land, in the absence
of the Govt. Order dated 21.3.1980.
15.14. In the above background, it cannot now be
contended by the petitioners that the
notification or a government order dated
21.3.1980 is in force, is applicable and the
petitioners can exercise their right under
the said notification. The very substratum
of the claim of the petitioners in WP No.
6278/2018 being the existence or W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 34
otherwise of the notification dated
21.3.1980 and the said notification not
being genuine, the question of making any
claim and for consideration of the said
claim by issuance of mandamus by this
Court would not arise.
15.15. In view of the above fact, once the land
has been gifted under Bhoodan and
Vidyadan scheme, there is no right which is
created in the donor or the legal
representatives of donor to seek for return
of the lands gifted for any reason
whatsoever. Once the land is gifted to the
Government, it is the responsibility of the
Government to put the land to the use for
which it was granted by way of a gift. At
the most, the donor or the legal
representatives of the donor can seek for a W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 35
direction to direct the Governmental
authorities to put the land to use for which
it was so gifted, they cannot seek for
return of the land granted by way of a gift
since the gift is complete on the gift deed
being executed, there cannot be return of
the land.
15.16. Furthermore, as contended by Sri.Sridhar
Prabhu, that Bhoodan and Vidyadan
Scheme has been repealed by the
Karnataka Bhoodan Yagna (Repeal) Act
1962, the question of reliance being placed
on the said scheme or the Act for the
purpose of resumption of the land would
not arise.
15.17. The Resumption of the land being not
capable of being done on account of W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 36
Karnataka Bhoodan Yagna (Repeal) Act,
1962, it cannot be now contended by the
petitioner that the land is required to be
resumed.
15.18. Though not necessary for the purposes of
this matter, since the issue of use has been
raised the same needs to be addressed, the
writ petitioners in W.P.No.9115/2018
having contended that the School has
already used the land or taking into
consideration the submission made by
respondent Santh Sevalal Development
Trust that the land is going to be used to
set up a Training Institute, as also for the
establishment of an Ayush hospital, it
cannot be said that land had not been put
to use, the land is also proposed to be put
to use for the greater public good of the W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 37
people residing in the area. The
establishment of a Technical Institute
would also satisfy the requirement of
following the terms of the grant made by
the donor under the Bhoodan and Vidyadan
Scheme.
15.19. Looked at it from any angle, the petitioner
in W.P.No.6278/2018 would not be entitled
for the return of the land as claimed.
15.20. Therefore, I answer point No.1 by
holding that once a land has been
gifted under Bhoodan and Vidyadan
Scheme, the land owner and/or legal
representatives of the land owner
cannot seek for return of the said land
on the ground that the land has not
been put to use for the purpose for W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 38
which the land was gifted, by relying
on the Government Order No.RD (Spl)
121 ECT 79 dated 21.3.1980.
16. ANSWER TO POINT NO.2: Whether the School development Committee or its office bearers can challenge the Govt. Order directing transference of the land vested with the School to the Santh Sevalal Development and Management committee?
16.1.It is by way of a Govt. Order that the land
is sought to be transferred to the Trust.
The Trust has been established in the name
of Santh Sevalal who is stated to hail from
the said area, and it is in his name that the
Government has decided to establish the
Trust in order to take up developmental
and educational activities for the benefit of
the residents of the area. The Trust is not
only to be vested with the present property
in dispute but also various other properties W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 39
and developmental activities which the
Trust is required to undertake as per the
Trust Deed. The persons nominated by the
Government manages the Trust. The
governing body of the Trust consists of
officers of the various departments holding
high posts like the Secretary of Health and
Family Welfare, Secretary of Education,
etc. In view of the same, the Government
has applied its mind to formulate a
particular Trust to undertake
developmental activities in the particular
area.
16.2. One of the lands which could be developed
and made use of the by Trust is the land,
subject matter of present dispute. It is the
endeavour of the Trust to establish a
technical institute as also a hospital. The W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 40
same cannot be challenged by the school
management committee, which is an ad-
hoc body created for the purposes of
running a Government School/College.
16.3. The contention of the petitioners in
WP.No.9115/2018 as contended in the
petition and addressed by
Sri.M.V.Maheshwarappa is that the land in
question has been put to use for the School
and once the land has been put for such
use there is a vested right created in favour
of the School and the land could not be
transferred by the Government to the
SSDM without considering the requirement
of the School.
16.4. The above aspect would have to be
considered in the context of the use that W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 41
the said School is alleged to have put the
land to. The only contention of
Sri.Maheshwarappa is that the land has
been put to use for the purpose of running
or conducting of cultural programs and
sports activities, planting of eucalyptus
tress as also for growing rice, jowar and
vegetabes, which is sold in the market and
the proceeds therefrom used for the
School. Apart from that there is no other
submission made either in the petition or
during the course of the arguments as
regards the use of the land by the School.
16.5. The aforesaid use which the petitioners
have sought to allege cannot be considered
as use so as to affect the running of the
School per se, if the land were to be
transferred to SSDM. The growing of W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 42
eucalyptus trees, the growing of rice/jowar
which is sold in the market and proceeds
used cannot be something which could
result in a vested right being created in
favour of the School.
16.6.If at all any of the above is to be
considered it is only the loss of certain
revenue in favour of School, which the
School can always represent to the
Government seeking for disbursement of
funds since the School/College is also run
by the Government, which is provided with
funds by the Government.
16.7. As regards the use of the land for cultural
activities and/or sports activities, despite
sufficient opportunity having been given,
the petitioners have not produced any
document to establish the running of any W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 43
cultural activities and/or sports activities
except for producing certain photographs
where certain children are seen on empty
land, there is no sports ground which has
been created or sports facility created
thereon. The cultural activities so called, is
only an assemblage of children which also
cannot be considered to be a use of the
land which would create a vested right in
the School.
16.8. Apart from the above, the petitioners being
the President and Secretary of a
Government school cannot challenge a
government order passed by the State
transferring the land to SSDM for the
purpose of running of a technical institute
and/or establishment of a Ayush College
which is in greater public good for the W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 44
entire region. Though this School cannot be considered to be a Governmental organ even if it were to be considered so and given such a status, one arm of the
Government cannot challenge the
Government as regards the bestowing of certain privileges on another arm of the
Government. If such a situation were to arise, it would result in chaos with each wing or each department of the
Government fighting with the other department of the Government. These kind of allegations cannot be encouraged by this Court preferring one arm of the
Government over the other arm of the
Government. In such situation, it is presumed that the Government which has acted by issuance of the notification has considered all the rival claims and/or rival W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 45
interest, if any, between various
governmental organizations/department
and the last order which has been passed is
considered to be the one which would be
applicable, more so when there is no
intervening private interest.
16.9. The land measuring more than 15 acres
cannot be put to such a use depriving the
Trust from making use of the land for the
establishment of a technical school and/or
hospital which are in a larger public
interest, at the most the contention of the
school management committee is that they
would be deprived of the earning out of
growth of the vegetables in the said land,
which has not been quantified. The school
Development Committee could always
approach the Government for sanction of W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 46
such funds which it would lose on account
of transfer of the land to the Trust, by
producing necessary documents evidencing
the amounts earned from such sale of
vegetables which would have been
accounted in the School/College records.
The minor monetary loss which is caused to
the School cannot be a ground for stopping
of the development of the said land by the
establishment of the technical institute, as
also the hospital as aforestated.
16.10. In view thereof, I am of the considered
opinion that the grievance of the school
management committee cannot be a
ground to challenge the transfer of the land
by the Government to the Trust in
question. Therefore, looked at it from any
angle, the petition as filed by the school W.P.No.6278 OF 2018 C/W W.P.No.9115 OF 2018 47
Management Committee also cannot be
considered and is required to be dismissed
and is so dismissed.
16.11. Hence I Answer point No.2 by holding that the School development Committee or its office bearers can not challenge the Govt. order directing transference of the land vested with the School to the Santh Sevalal Development and Management Board.
17. ANSWER TO POINT NO.3: What Order?
For all the aforesaid reasons, I am of the
considered opinion that the claim of the
petitioners in both the Petitions are not
maintainable as such both the petitions are
dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE KGR */ ln