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
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
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
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
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
succeed in the Writ Petition No. 7236/2025
(SC/ST) and will abide by the orders of this
Hon'ble Court."
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:18324-DB
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
