Sri Anjaneya Swamy Temple Seva Mandali v. The Union of India

Order dated

18.08.2017 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.3.

¶3Sri. Abhinav Ramanand A., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, invited the attention of this court to the judgment and decree dated

14.06.1990 in OS.No.10707/1982 on the file of XIV Additional City Civil Judge at Mayo Hall, Bangalore City, Annexure-D, wherein, the petitioner No.1 herein has stated that the land in-question has been purchased by the petitioner committee in the year 1914. It is also submitted by the learned counsel representing the petitioners that, no notice has been issued before issuing the order at Annexure-J to the writ petition and accordingly sought for interference of this Court.

¶4Per contra, Sri. A. Chandra Chud, learned CGSPC appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned order at Annexure-J to the writ petition.

¶5Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and also on careful examination of Annexure-E, wherein, in the Possession Certificate, it is stated that the land is being purchased by the committee in the year 1914 to an extent of 5 acres 14 guntas, and same was handed over to the Mandir Committee. I have also noticed the finding recorded by the Trial Court in O.S.No.10707/1982 (Annexure-D). In that view of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the respondent No.3 is directed to issue Show Cause Notice to the petitioner and thereafter, to take a decision in the matter in accordance with law. It is also made clear that, while issuing a notice to the petitioner herein, the respondent shall consider the order passed by the Trial Court in the above case, as well as the Annexure-E to the writ petition,

¶6Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 18.08.2017 issued under Section 3A of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, (Annexure-J) is hereby, set aside. iii. Liberty is reserved to the respondent No. 3 to take decision in accordance with law. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

e -e1e-eeeee e e NC:(2025:KHC:53271 WP(No.(42180(of(2017 IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( THDATED(THIS(THE(15 (DAY(OF(DECEMBER,(2025( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(E.S.INDIRESH( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(42180(OF(2017((GM-PP) BETWEEN:( 1., SRI,ANJANEYA,SWAMY,TEMPLE,SEVA,MANDALI, THE,SOCIETY,, REGISTERED,UNDER,THE,PROVISIONS,OF,THE, KARNTAKA,SOCIETIES,, REGISTRATION,ACT,, HAVING,ITS,OFFICE,AT,, SURVEY,NO.5/2,,DESRAJ,URS,ROAD,, J.C.NAGARA,(MUNIREDDI,PALYA),, BENGALURU,–,560,006., REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,GENRAL,SECRETARY,, SRI.,K.S.MAHADEVA,RAO,, AGED,ABOUT,77,YEARS,, S/O,LATE,SRI.,SATWAJI,RAO., Digitally signedtiby SREEDHARAN BANGALORE 2., SRI.,SANJEEV,KUMAR, SUSHMA LAKSHMI AGED,ABOUT,48,YEARS, Location:0High S/O,LATE,SRI.JAYARAM,,Courttiof Karnataka RESIDENT,OF,SY.NO.5/2,, KAVAL,BYRASANDRA,VILLAGE,, J.C.NAGARA,(MUNIREDDI,PALYA),, BENGALURU,–,560,006., …PETITIONERS, (BY,SRI.,ABHINAV,RAMANAND,A,,ADVOCATE), e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2025:KHC:53271 WP(No.(42180(of(2017 AND: 1., THE,UNION,OF,INDIA, MINISTRY,OF,DEFENCE,, PARLIAMENT,SECRETARIAT,, NEW,DELHI,–,110,001., REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,SECRETARY., 2., PARACHUTE,REGIMENT,TRAINING,CENTRE,(PRTC), J.C.NAGARA,,BENGALURU,–,560,006., REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,COMMANDER, 3., THE,BRIGADIER/ESTATE,OFFICER, THE,STATION,HEAD,QUARTERS,, CUBBON,ROAD,, BENGALURU,–,560,001., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,A,CHANDRA,CHUD,,CGSPC,FOR,R1,TO,R3), , THIS,WP,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226,AND,227,OF,THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE, ORDER, RDPASSED, BY, THE, 3 , RESPONDENT, BEARING, NO.7224/PPE/PRTC/SVY, NO.56-2/KB/(2-K)/2017, DATED, 18.08.2017,AT,ANNEXURE-J,TO,THE,WRIT,PETITION,AND,ETC.,, , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,FINAL,HEARING,,THIS, DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. Heard Sri.Abhinav Ramanand A., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. A. Chandra Chud, learned CGSPC appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioners are assailing the