[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Smt. Sakamma vs The Assistant Executive Engineer on 18 December, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
WP No. 6015 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.6015 OF 2018 (GM-PP)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SAKAMMA
W/O MARIDEVAIAH
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
D.NO.79, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
2. SMT. SAJEEDA BEGUM
W/O SYED GAFFAR
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
D.NO.95, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
Digitally signed by ASHOKA ROAD
ARUNKUMAR M S MYSURU - 570 007.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 3. SMT. KHAMARUNNISA
W/O ABDUL KHUDDUS
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
D.NO.83, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
4. SMT. CHIKKAMMANNI
W/O LATE CHANNANAYAKA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
D.NO.53, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
WP No. 6015 of 2018
HC-KAR
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
5. SMT. MAMTAX BEGUM
W/O LATE MOHAMMED PEER
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
D.NO.82, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
6. SRI. SYED ZAFRRULLA
S/O LATE SYED MOHIDDEEN
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
D.NO.95, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
7. SRI. SYED MADAR
S/O LATE SYED ABDUL REHMAN
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
D.NO.101, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
8. SRI. M. SARVAR KHAN
S/O LATE MOHAMMED KHAN
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS
D.NO.95, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
9. SRI. ABDUL RAVOOF
S/O LATE M. IBRAHIM
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
D.NO.87, 3RD INFANTRY LINE
PWD RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
WP No. 6015 of 2018
HC-KAR
ASHOKA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 007.
....PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. N. RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. VANAJAKSHI KAMATH ADVOCATE FOR P1 TO P6;
P7 & P8 ABATED)
AND:
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PWD NO.1, SPECIAL SUB DIVISION
VINOBHA ROAD
MYSURU - 570 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO.7/2015-16 AND ALSO
ISSUING FINAL NOTICE IN FORM NO.B DATED 31.05.2016 BY
COMPETENT OFFICER/ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OF
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, MYSORE THE RESPONDENT
HEREIN PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A CONSEQUENTLY THE
JUDGMENT IN M.A. NOS. 23, 24, 26, 27, 29 TO 33/2016 ON
THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE OF MYSURU
DATED 02.01.2018 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B ALSO BE
QUASHED AND ETC.
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR
ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY,
E.S. INDIRESH J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
CAV ORDER
1. In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the final
notices in Form 'B' dated 31.05.2016 (Annexure- 'A series')
issued by the competent officer / Assistant Executive Engineer
of Public Works Department, Mysuru and the order dated
02.01.2018 in M.A.No.23/2016 connected with M.A.Nos.24, 26,
27, 29 to 33 of 2016 on the file of IV Addl. District Judge,
Mysuru (Annexure-B).
2. It is the case of the petitioners, that petitioners claim to
be in possession of the quarters allotted by His Highness the
Maharaja of Mysore, as the petitioners are the descendents of
the employees occupying different portions of the house as
mentioned in the cause-title. It is also stated that, the
petitioners have been advised to continue in possession on
ownership basis as they were working under the Maharaja of
Mysore. It is also stated that, the petitioners have approached
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
the respondent - Government, seeking allotment of the
quarters and same was not considered and accordingly, the
petitioners have filed W.P.Nos.20499/1997, 24482-86/1997,
14915/1998, 14914/1998, 38133/1998, 38396/1998,
9179/2000 and W.P.No.10647/2006 before this Court and this
Court, disposed of the writ petitions as per Annexure-C series,
with a direction to the respondent - Government, to consider
the case of the petitioners. It is also stated that, without
considering the representations of the petitioners, the
respondent have issued notice dated 31.05.2006(Annexure- 'A
series'). It is also stated that, the order of vacating the
premises was confirmed in the order dated 02.01.2018 passed
by the District Court, as per Annexure-B to the writ petition.
Feeling aggrieved by the same, present writ petition has been
filed.
3. Heard Sri. N. Ravindranath Kamath, learned Senior
Counsel appearing on behalf of Smt. Vanajakshi Kamath,
learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Mahantesh Shettar,
learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the
respondent.
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
4. It is argued by the learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioners that, though this Court has directed the respondent
to consider the representations made by the petitioners as per
Annexure-C to the writ petition, the same has not been
considered by the respondent and therefore, the entire
proceedings against the petitioners, requires to be set aside. It
is also argued by the learned Senior Counsel that, the
petitioners cannot be evicted by invoking the provisions of the
Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised
Occupants) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and
the entire proceedings require to be quashed.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate
appearing for the respondent refers to the finding recorded by
this Court in W.P.No.10647/2006 (Annexure-C6) and
contended that, the writ petition requires to be dismissed.
6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing for the parties, the claim of the petitioners
that, the petitioners are the descendents of the employees of
the Maharaja of Mysore and are occupying the quarters
belonging to His Highness Maharaja of Mysore. After the
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
Government took over the administration from His Highness
Maharaja of Mysore, the petitioners have continued in the
quarters and the Public Works Department had taken care of
the premises in question. Petitioners have approached this
Court in the writ petitions referred to at Annexure-C series,
seeking ownership of the houses on the ground that the
petitioners were the descendents of employees of His Highness
Maharaja of Mysore. In this regard, it is relevant to extract
paragraph No.7 in W.P.No.10647/2006 dated 03.06.2008
(Annexure-C6).
"7. There are eight petitioners. There is no proof to
show that petitioners-5 & 7 had filed writ petition in the
year 1997 before this Court. It is pertinent to mention
that on 22.7.99 in W.P. No. 20499/97 respondents were
granted three months' time to consider the petitioners'
representation and until then not to disturb their
possession. The writ petitioners were disposed of in the
month of July 1999. If it is the case of the petitioners
that the respondents have not considered their
representations within the time stipulated, they could
have approached this Court for appropriate relief. The
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
petitioners remained silent until the respondent no.4-
authority issued the impugned notices in the month of
July 2006. It is implicit that the respondent considered
the representation of the petitioners and decided that
they no right to seek for sale of the quarters in which
they are in possession. The respondents have issued
notice to the petitioners to vacate their respective
premises within 15 days from the date of service of
notices. In my view, the petitioners have no legal right
to ask the respondents to sell PWD quarters in their
favour on lease cum sale basis. Though the petitioners
have retired form the service on their attaining the age
of superannuation during the year 1995-1996, the
petitioners/legal heirs are still in occupation of the
premises. According to the respondents, the petitioner
are unauthorised occupants. The petitioners have not
established violation of any statutory right in their
favour."
7. Perusal of the observation made by this Court would
indicate that the petitioners have been identified as
unauthorised occupants and therefore, the respondent -
authority has rightly issued eviction notices as per Annexure- 'A
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
series'. The said eviction notices were challenged by the
petitioners in M.A.Nos.23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 of
2016 and the competent Court by its order dated 02.01.2018
(Annexure-B), dismissed the appeals. On careful examination
of the finding recorded by the Trial Court would indicate that,
the petitioners are claiming right from their ancestors in
respect of the premises in question. It is also to be noted that,
this Court in above writ petitions has held that the petitioners
are in unauthorised occupation as the petitioners were not
tenants of the respondent.
8. In that view of the matter, as the petitioners are residing
in the premises as unauthorised occupants and also taking into
account the observation made by the Trial Court at paragraph
Nos.23 to 25 in M.A.No.23/2016 and connected appeals at
Annexure-B, I am of the view that, no interference is called for
in this writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition is
rejected.
9. It is to be noted that, if the petitioners are in possession
of the subject premises as on today, the respondent - authority
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:54312
HC-KAR
is directed not to take any coercive steps for eviction of such
petitioners, for a period of six weeks from today.
10. Consequently, pending I.A. if any, does not survive for
consideration.
SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
sac
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48
