Karnataka High Court
Smt Pramila Naik vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 May, 2025
Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
WA No. 755 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT APPEAL NO. 755 OF 2025 (SC/ST)
BETWEEN:
SMT PRAMILA NAIK
W/O LATE SHIVAMADA NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 269, 3RD MAIN ROAD,
ISRO LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560078.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PUNEETH C, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. BHASKAR GOWDA N M.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
N DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
Location:
High Court M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001.
of Karnataka
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION,
BENGALURU-560009.
3. THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
WA No. 755 of 2025
4. SMT PANKAJA,
W/O LATE H.K.RAJASHEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
5. SRI SAMRUDDHA,
S/O LATE H.K.RAJASHEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
6. SRI PRABUDDHA,
S/O LATE H.K.RAJASHEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO. 4 TO 6 ARE
RESIDING AT NO. 112, UDAYAPURA VILLAGE,
KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD,
O.B.CHOODAHALLI CROSS,
BENGALURU-560082.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.R. KHAMROZ KHAN., AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. SIDDHARTH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. VINAYAKA B , ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 17.04.2025 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN WP No-
7236/2025 (SC-ST) BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE APPEAL
CONSEQUENTLY; b) ALLOW THE IA No-1 IN WP No-
7236/2025 (SC-ST) AS PRAYED FOR.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
WA No. 755 of 2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) The appellant is the respondent in W.P. No.7236/2025, which is filed by the private respondents herein, calling in question the orders of the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner in the proceedings under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. The Writ Court, by the impugned interim order, has restrained the appellant and the private respondents from alienating or dealing with or encumbering the subject property while also restraining them from changing the character or putting up construction in the property.
2. On 20.05.2025, Sri Puneeth C, the learned counsel for the appellant, was heard on the -4- NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB WA No. 755 of 2025 appellant's grievance with this interim order with the learned counsel essentially contending that the private respondents would be entitled for possession of the subject property, only if they succeed finally in the proceedings, as the property must be resumed in accordance with law and that even before the date of filing of the writ petition, the appellant had commenced process for setting up a petrol retail outlet in the subject property. The learned counsel had emphasized that with the interim order, the appellant faces forfeiture of the amounts deposited with the Oil Company if there is cancellation of the letter of intent.
3. This Court, after hearing Sri Vinayaka B, the learned counsel for the respondents-petitioners, has permitted the appellant to file an affidavit stating the terms on which she could be permitted to pursue her applications for operating the retail petrol outlet subject to the outcome in the writ proceedings. The -5- NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB WA No. 755 of 2025 appellant has now filed an affidavit stating amongst others:-
"5. I further state that, I have entered into lease agreement with one Abhilash and another for setting up a retail fuel station and accordingly the Lessees have filed application with the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and they were offered to setup the fuel station and accordingly they were issued letter of intent dated 29.01.2024 and have deposited the amount before the Hindustan Petroleum and I have also filed application seeking conversion of land accordingly and the said application is kept pending due the interim order dated 17.04.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No. 7236/2025.
6. I further state that, I shall obtain the conversion of the land from the competent authority and I shall undertake to develop the property in question for setting up the retail fuel station as per the letter of intent dated 29.01.2024 and I shall not claim any equity before this Hon'ble court in the event the Respondent No. 4 to 6 succeed in the Writ Petition No. 7236/2025 (SC/ST) and will abide by the orders of this Hon'ble Court."-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB WA No. 755 of 2025 Sri Puneeth C, the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri S.R.Khamroz Khan, the learned Additional Government Advocate, and Sri Siddharth, the learned counsel for Sri Vinayaka B, who is on record for the private respondents are heard.
4. With the appellant being categorical that she will not claim equity and begin operating the Petrol Retail Outlet subject to the outcome in the writ petition after securing all requisite permissions and approvals, this Court is of the considered view that the writ appeal must be disposed of modifying the interim order granted in W.P.No.7236/2025 permitting the appellant to pursue the different applications filed to secure conversion and all other permissions to start the Retail Outlet and to operate the same strictly under law until the outcome in the pending proceedings in W.P No.7236/2025 but without claiming any equity howsoever. -7-
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB WA No. 755 of 2025
5. The writ appeal stands disposed of. It is needless to observe that this permission does not authorize the appellant to sell or otherwise create third party interest in the subject property.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NMS