Karnataka High Court
Al Ameen Medical College vs State Of Karnataka And Ors on 7 February, 2024
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
WA No.200109 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT APPEAL NO.200109 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
AL AMEEN MEDICAL COLLEGE
AND HOSPITAL, OWNED AND
MANAGED BY THE AL-AMEEN
CHARITABLE FUND TRUST
ATHANI ROAD
VIJAYAPURA - 586 108
REPTD. BY ITS TRUSTEE/TREASURER
MS. SAYEEDA HINA AHMED
D/O MR. ZIAULLA SHARIFF SAHEB
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed
by SWETA
(BY SRI P.S.MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
KULKARNI AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
VIKASA SOUDHA, 3RD FLOOR
BANGALORE - 560 001
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION
VIJAYAPURA - 586 101
3. ASST. DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
CITY SURVEY, VIJAYAPURA - 586 101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R1 TO R3)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
WA No.200109 of 2023
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ISSUE AN
ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.08.2023
PASSED IN W.P NO.200538/2023 BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION BY QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 10.02.2023, VIDE ANNEXURE - A;
ISSUE AN ORDER DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS. 2 AND 3
TO CONDUCT THE SURVEY OF THE PORTION OF THE LAND
WHICH IS ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN ENCROACHED BY THE
APPELLANT AFTER NOTICE AND IN THE PRESENCE OF THE
APPELLANT AND THEREAFTER PRODUCED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH LAW AND ETC.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
B.M.SHYAM PRASAD J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is by an Institution which runs a medical
college and a hospital, and this Institution is aggrieved by
the disposal of its writ petition in W.P.No.200538/2023
(GM-RES) on 10.08.2023. The institution, which is hereafter
referred to as appellant, has filed its writ petition in
W.P.No.200538/2023 impugning the Communication dated
10.02.2023 issued by the second respondent calling upon
the appellant to remove encroachment to avoid coercive
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
measures. The writ Court has observed that because the
appellant has not challenged the acquisition proceedings
and in view of the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and another
vs. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam Sangharsh
Samiti and others1 the writ petition would not survive for
consideration, and the writ Court has also observed that it
would be upto the appellant to approach the appropriate
civil Court for redressal of its grievance.
2. Sri P.S. Malipatil, the learned counsel for the
appellant, submits that the appellant's specific case is that it
has not encroached any portion of the Road and it has only
constructed a compound and fence for its property, and as
such, there was no need to challenge the acquisition
proceedings; and that in the light of this grievance and the
appellant's willingness to file reply to the Communication
dated 10.02.2023, this Court, on 28.11.2023, has permitted
the appellant to file a reply to establish its case that it has
not encroached any portion of the road and it has
(2008) 12 SCC 675
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
constructed compound and fence only for its land while also
directing the respondents not to take any coercive measures.
3. It is now brought on record that after this liberty,
the appellant has filed certain documents, and in
consideration thereof, the respondents have requested the
jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records to conduct
a survey of the appellant's land to verify whether there is
encroachment. Sri P.S. Malipatil further submits that if
ultimately it is ascertained that the appellant is in
possession of any land which is outside the boundaries of its
title, the appellant will not have any grievance and even if
any portion of the appellant's land is required for
construction of the Road [or Road widening], the appellant is
willing to give it up provided appropriate compensation is
paid in accordance with law.
4. Sri Mallikarjun C. Basareddy, who is heard for
final disposal of the writ petition in the light of the afore
circumstances and submissions, argues that it would be
imperative for both the appellant and the authorities to
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
jointly request the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land
Records to expedite a joint survey as otherwise the process
could be delayed. These circumstances and submissions
are considered. The appellant is categorical that its land is
not notified for acquisition and it has not encroached any
notified land or otherwise. This Court, because the
appellant and the respondents are willing to participate in a
survey to ascertain whether there is encroachment, is of the
considered view that in the peculiarities of the case where,
the writ appeal must be disposed of modifying the writ
Court's order in the following terms. Hence, the following:
ORDER
[i] The writ appeal is allowed in part, and the
writ Court's order dated 10.08.2023 is
modified directing the third respondent to
take such measures as would be necessary to
complete the survey of the appellant's lands
to ascertain whether any portion thereof is
required for construction of Road [or for Road
Widening].
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
[ii] The appellant, to facilitate compliance with
the afore direction, is directed to file an
application with the third respondent
enclosing a certified copy of this order within
a period of seven days [7] from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this order.
[iii] The third respondent shall complete the
exercise of survey within a period of six [6]
weeks from the date of the receipt of the
application, and it is needless to observe that
the third respondent must hold such survey
not only in the presence of appellant but also
the owners of the adjacent lands, if any.
[iv] The second respondent, upon receipt of report
from the Assistant Director of Land Records
after a survey as now enabled, shall decide on
the appellant's grievance as against the
allegation of encroachment in the light of the
submissions made before this Court that the
appellant will yield possession of such extent
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1343-DB
of land as may be required for construction of
Road [or Road Widening] provided
compensation is paid in accordance with law.
[v] Until the aforesaid exercise is completed,
there shall be no precipitation by the
respondents.
In view of disposal of main appeal, the pending
application in I.A.No.2/2023 will not survive for
consideration, and the same stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
BL
Ct;Vk
