17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE (ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION NO. 15511-14 OF 2013 [GM - RES] PIL BETWEEN: 1. Samaj Parivartana Samudaya A Society registered under Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, having its principal office at ‘Ashadeep’, Jayanagar Cross, Saptapur, Dharwad – 580 001 Karnataka Represented by its Executive Director Sri S.R.Hiremath Petitioner No.1 2. Sri Deepak.C.N. S/o C.M.Nagaraju, Aged 34 years, Residing at No.723, 13 th Cross, 1 st Phase, BEL Layout, Bharathi Nagar, Bangalore Karnataka Petitioner No.2 3. Dr S.L.Pawar S/o Lakshman Rao Pawar Aged 67 years, Residing close to Head Post Office, Ranebennur – 581 115 Haveri District Karnataka Petitioner No.3 4. Sri Raghavendra Kushtagi S/o Venkoba Achar Aged 63 years, Residing at No.2-6-67/70 Manik Prabhu Layout, Near Dental College, Raichur Petitioner No.4
71
Embed
W/P No. 15511-14 of 2013 in the High Court of Karnataka
A Public Interest Litigation filed by the Samaj Parivartana Samudaya against the Union of India & Ors. to seek action against the government for failure to take action against the numerous instances of land-grabbing that have occurred in the the state of Karnataka including the city of Bangalore.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
(ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION NO. 15511-14 OF 2013 [GM - RES] PIL
BETWEEN:
1. Samaj Parivartana SamudayaA Society registered under Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960,having its principal office at‘Ashadeep’, Jayanagar Cross, Saptapur,Dharwad – 580 001KarnatakaRepresented by its Executive DirectorSri S.R.Hiremath Petitioner No.1
2. Sri Deepak.C.N.S/o C.M.Nagaraju,Aged 34 years,Residing at No.723, 13th Cross,1st Phase, BEL Layout,Bharathi Nagar,BangaloreKarnataka Petitioner No.2
3. Dr S.L.PawarS/o Lakshman Rao PawarAged 67 years,Residing close to Head Post Office,Ranebennur – 581 115Haveri DistrictKarnataka Petitioner No.3
4. Sri Raghavendra KushtagiS/o Venkoba AcharAged 63 years,Residing at No.2-6-67/70Manik Prabhu Layout,Near Dental College,RaichurKarnataka Petitioner No.4
AND:
1. Union of IndiaThrough its Secretary, Ministry of Environment and ForestsParyavaran Bhawan,
Respondent No.1
18
CGO Complex, Lodhi RoadNew Delhi – 110 003
2. State of KarnatakaThrough its Chief SecretaryVidhana SoudhaBangalore -560 001Karnataka
Respondent No.2
3. Karnataka Public Lands CorporationRepresented by its Managing Director2nd Floor, Deputy Commissioners Office Building,K.G. Road, Bangalore – 560 009Karnataka
Respondent No.3
WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
The Petitioners above named most respectfully
submit as under:-
1. The short but important question of law that arises for the
consideration of this Hon’ble Court in this case is:
Is it lawful for our executive Government to
deliberately, knowingly and intentionally refuse to act
when it is provided with specific, definite and actual
information that certain Government lands have been
encroached upon by private persons through
clandestine, illegal, manipulative, corrupt or fraudulent
means?
2. The address of the parties for the purposes of issuance of
Court Notice, Summons etc., from this Hon’ble Court is as
shown in the cause title and the petitioners may also be
served through their counsel, Sri K.V.Dhananjay and Sri
Gopala Krishna, Advocates, No.296, Magadi Main Road,
Kamakshipalya, Bangalore – 560 079.
Facts of the case:
19
3. The Petitioners are filing this Writ Petition in terms of Article
226 of the Constitution of India solely in public interest. The
petitioners are aggrieved with the fact of extensive,
sustained, clandestine, unbridled and continuing
encroachment of public lands in the State of Karnataka. The
fact of such encroachment is documented by no less than
the Karnataka State Legislature and by the Executive
Government of Karnataka. In this regard, the Reports
submitted by the Joint Legislature Committee of the
Legislature of Karnataka and the subsequent report of the
Task Force for Recovery of Public Land and its Protection do
prove to a legal certainty that vested interests within the
Government are primarily responsible for massive
encroachment of Government lands.
4. The aforesaid Reports show that nearly 11,00,000 acres
(Eleven Lakh acres) of Government lands have been
allowed to be encroached by private persons and vested
interests across the State of Karnataka. This estimate is not
a mere guess work but is a product of careful verification of
the records, enquiry and spot inspection in many cases by
the Karnataka Legislature Committee and by a dedicated
Task Force appointed by our State Government. Of the
11,00,000 acres (Eleven Lakh acres) of encroached upon
Government land, 1,65,796 acres (One Lakh Sixty Five
Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety acres) are forest
lands. Of this 1,65,795 acres (One Lakh Sixty Five Thousand
Seven Hundred and Ninety Six acres) of forest lands,
1,04,497 acres (One Lakh Four Thousand Four Hundred and
Ninety Seven acres) are in the ecologically sensitive
Western Ghats in three districts alone.
5. Applying the Government published guidance values (which
are often conservative) wherever appropriate, the value of
such encroached upon lands has been estimated by the
Government Task Force for Recovery of Public Land and its
20
Protection to be around Rs.1,95,000 Crores (Rupees One
Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Crores Only).
6. In perspective, a sum of Rs.1,95,000 Crores (Rupees One
Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Crores Only) is far larger than
the loss estimated to have been caused by corruption
involved in the 2G spectrum scam and the illegal mining
scam in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.
7. The Petitioners are also filing this petition with a prayer for
strict compliance with the Order dated 28-Jan-2011 passed
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal
No.1132 of 2011 i.e., Jagpal Singh and others v. State of
Punjab and others AIR 2011 SC 1123 and in W.P. No.202 of
1995, i.e. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India. It is
submitted that vide the said Orders, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court had directed that effective steps be taken for the
protection of public lands from encroachment, by all States.
Despite the aforesaid Order, the State of Karnataka has not
merely failed to take effective steps for compliance with the
said Order but has intentionally and knowingly disbanded a
dedicated task force called ‘The Task Force for Recovery of
Public Land and its Protection’ whose purpose was the same
as the direction contained in the aforesaid Orders of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court.
8. After the said disbandment, the Petitioners, vide letter
dated 25-July-2012 had requested the Chief Secretary,
Government of Karnataka to take urgent and necessary
steps for the implementation of the Task Force Report dated
30-Jun-2011. Faced with no response from the Government,
the petitioners wrote to the Chief Secretary again on 27 -
Aug-2012. As of today, the Petitioners have not heard
anything in response to their representation to the
Government of Karnataka. Faced with this situation, these
21
petitioners have realised that there is no further recourse
available to them than to approach this Hon’ble Court.
9. The Petitioner No.1, Samaj Parivartana Samudaya is a
Society registered under the Karnataka Societies
Registration Act, 1960 under No.162/83-84 dated 06-Mar-
1984. The activities of the Petitioner No.1 encompass
different fields such as prevention of pollution in the
Tungabhadra River in Karnataka due to lax supervision of
polluting industries, safeguarding of common lands, social
forestry, wasteland development, the promotion of
decentralized nurseries and the conservation and protection
of the Western Ghats. The Petitioner No.1 works in close
collaboration with many other non-Governmental and
humanitarian organisations. Amongst other cases filed in
courts, the Petitioner No.1 was the petitioner in Writ Petition
(Civil) No.562 of 2009 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India bringing to its notice, the fact of widespread and large
scale illegal mining in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.
Further, the founder of the Petitioner No.1, Sri S.R.Hiremath,
was the applicant in IA No.60 in Writ Petition No.202 of 1995
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The said IA concerned
the forest and tribal issues in the Bastar region of the then
Madhya Pradesh (now Chattisgarh). Further, the Petitioner
No.1 had also filed Writ Petition No.35 of 1987 seeking
restoration and restitution of 75000 acres of forest lands
from a joint sector company called Karnataka Pulpwood
Limited to the village communities in four districts of
Karnataka. In short, the Petitioner No.1 has been working in
the arena of environment, forests, good governance and
anti-corruption.
10. The Petitioner No.2, Sri Deepak.C.N., is a social activist who
has rendered his services to various social awareness
programmes. The Petitioner No.2 was involved with
‘Janaagraha’, a non-governmental organisation to create
22
awareness among citizens in matters related to governance
for over a period of five years.
11. The Petitioner No.3, Dr S.L.Pawar is a doctor of medicine by
profession and hails from Ranebennur town in Haveri
district. The Petitioner No.3 has served as the Secretary and
President of the Indian Medical Association, Ranebennur.
The Petitioner No.3 has also served as the President of
‘NEEDS’, a non-governmental organization for four years.
12. The Petitioner No.4, Sri Raghavendra Kushtagi is a social
activist and is currently the President of Hyderabad
Karnataka Janandolana Kendra. This organisation had
fought for the successful implementation of Article 371 of
the Constitution for the four districts of Karnataka i.e., Bidar,
Gulbarga, Raichur and Bellary. He is also serving as the
Executive of Janasangarama Parishad, a body which has as
its aim, the protection of natural resources and other land
related issues.
13. The Respondent No.1, the Union of India, is represented by
the Ministry of Environment and Forests. This Ministry is the
nodal agency in the administrative structure of the Central
Government for the planning, promotion, co-ordination and
overseeing the implementation of India’s environmental and
forestry policies and programmes. It is the solemn duty of
the Union of India to oversee the implementation of its
policies and programs relating to conservation of the
country's natural resources including its lakes and rivers, its
biodiversity, forests and wildlife and to ensure the
protection of animal life and the prevention and abatement
of pollution.
14. The Respondent No.2 i.e., State of Karnataka is the
custodian and legal owner of all public lands within the
territory of the State of Karnataka. It is the guardian of the
common lands which are a common and shared heritage
23
not only of the current citizenry of the State, but of all
future citizens. It is the solemn duty of the State to ensure
that such common lands are preserved intact and not
usurped illegally. The Respondent No.2 is also entrusted
with the legal and constitutional duty to ensure strict and
effective implementation of the laws already in place to
protect and preserve public lands.
15. The Respondent No.3, Karnataka Public Lands Corporation
Limited is a body corporate that has been specifically
incorporated by the Government of Karnataka with the
avowed objective of protecting government lands recovered
from encroachment. The fact that a body corporate even
came to be established to keep a vigil over formerly
encroached upon Government lands itself speaks volumes
about the extent of such encroachment.
16. On 17-Jun-2006, the Legislature of Karnataka had appointed
a Joint Legislature Committee comprising of 14 MLAs and 6
MLCs under the chairmanship of Sri A.T.Ramaswamy to
inquire into and submit a detailed Report on encroachment
of Government lands in Bangalore and its adjoining areas.
During its tenure, this Joint Legislature Committee (referred
to hereinafter as ‘JLC’, for short) received 1,101 complaints,
conducted 40 meetings, visited 90 sites of encroachments
over several days and conducted over 200 internal review
meetings. Numerous representations, information,
grievance and complaints received by the JLC were
promptly registered and enquired into by it. Twenty Eight
(28) different departments and statutory bodies were
summoned before the JLC and were asked to inform about
the various aspects of implementation of cases referred to
them by the JLC.
17. After the aforesaid detailed enquiry, the JLC submitted two
reports on 01-Feb-2007 and 26-Jul-2007 to the Karnataka
24
Legislature. Original versions of the Joint Legislature
Committee reports dated 01-Feb-2007 and 26-Jul-2007 are
produced herewith and marked as Annexure - A and
Annexure - B respectively.
18. The interim and final JLC reports conclude that various State
instrumentalities such as the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara
Palike which is nothing but the Bangalore Municipal
Corporation, the Bangalore Development Authority, City and
Town Municipal Councils etc., have grossly and knowingly
failed in their legal and statutory duty to protect
Government and public lands. Instead, these bodies have
found it convenient to express helplessness and have in
many cases, acted as active participants, abettors and
promoters in land grabbing crimes in tandem with members
of organised land grabbers.
19. At this context, it becomes necessary to note the role of one
Sri V.Balasubramanian (IAS), Retd. Sri V.Balasubramanian
was the adviser to the JLC and had previously held the office
of the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka.
Eager to know the model that had been implemented in the
neighbouring State of Andhra Pradesh to combat the evil of
land grabbing, Sri V.Balasubramanian along with the
Secretary for Parliamentary Affairs and Legislation and the
Principal Secretary to the Revenue Department had visited
the neighbouring State of Andhra Pradesh to study the
functioning of the Special Courts established under the
provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 and the mechanisms adopted by the
Hyderabad Urban Development Authority and the Municipal
Corporation of Hyderabad for preventing encroachments.
Pursuant to the aforesaid study and the JLC report, the
Karnataka Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Bill, 2007 was tabled
and passed by both the Houses of the Karnataka
Legislature, unanimously. Moreover, the Revenue
25
Department had also piloted a legislation for incorporating
an amendment to the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964
(‘KLR Act’) to separately criminalise acts of land grabbing
(Section 192-A of the KLR Act).
20. Although the JLC did submit very elaborate and detailed
reports to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the
Karnataka Legislative Assembly itself came to be dissolved
in 2007 and the JLC accordingly, stood defunct consequent
to the imposition of the President’s rule in the State. Later,
upon formation of a newly elected Government, no
immediate action was taken to implement the
recommendations of the JLC.
21. The JLC Reports: (Note: The word ‘Halli’ in Kannada means a
‘village’ and countless city regions in the State still carry the
name ‘Halli’ though such a ‘halli’ in the heart of say, the city
of Bangalore, Mysore or Belgaum is nothing more than a
vestige from the past). The following findings from the JLC
reports may be noted:
22. An area of 1099 acres of forest land has been encroached
by 312 persons in Bangalore Urban District Forest Division.
Further, 313 acres of tank bed lands have been similarly
encroached upon by 553 persons. The Bannerghatta
National Park which spans over 7374 acres has also been
encroached by 813 different persons to an extent of 767
acres.
23. Certain real estate businesses in conspiracy with a few
builders from Hyderabad have created bogus sale records in
respect of forest land in Uttarahalli Manavarathe Kaval
Minor Forest and have therefore grabbed 344 acres of
pristine forest lands. Out of this grabbed area, the
Bangalore Development Authority has knowingly proceeded
to acquire 42 acres in the name of ‘Banashankari VI Stage
Project’ and has, very surprisingly, passed an award for
26
payment of Rs.3.6 Crores in favour of persons claiming to
be unauthorized cultivators. This land lies within 15
kilometres from the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
limits and is therefore, expressly barred from being
regularised in terms of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act,
1964. Even with full awareness of this prohibition, the
Bangalore Development Authority and the Land Tribunal
have disregarded this and have passed compensation
awards in respect of the said forest land in favour of private
persons.
24. In December 2008, the Karnataka Public Lands Corporation
Limited i.e., the Respondent No.5 was incorporated with
Rupees Five (5) Crores of paid up capital inter alia to protect
government lands recovered from encroachment.
25. Thereafter, in order to effectively implement the
recommendations of the JLC, a dedicated body called as the
‘Task Force for Recovery of Public Land and its Protection’
was constituted under the chairmanship of the former
Additional Chief Secretary, Sri V.Balasubramanian, IAS
(Retd.). This was done through a Government Notification
Vide G.O. No.RD 556/LGB/2009 dated 19-Sept-2009 which
did specify that as part of its work, this Task Force was
required to issue directions to the several Government
departments and statutory bodies to take specific and
appropriate action to remove encroachments. Thereby, this
Task Force was legally established for the purpose of
ensuring the implementation of various laws and statutes
that were already in existence to recover encroached public
land. Unlike the objective of the JLC which was confined to
address the encroachment of public lands in Bangalore and
its surrounding areas, the jurisdiction of this Task Force was
extended to cover the entire territory of the State of
Karnataka and to all Government lands including lands
vested in statutory and local bodies. The “Task Force for
27
Recovery of Public Land and its Protection” shall be referred
to hereinafter as “Task Force”.
26. This Task Force undertook enormous efforts to identify
encroached public lands throughout the State of Karnataka.
It took various steps such as conduct of spot inspections,
tracing the history of land records in respect of encroached
upon property, verification and scrutiny of property
documents and Government records and the issuing of
numerous and co-ordinated instructions to the Government
authorities to take immediate and time-bound steps for the
recovery of encroached public lands.
27. The Petitioners state that the Task Force had not only
issued a detailed statement of its activities in the form of a
Final Report but had also issued or otherwise ensured
issuance of numerous reports in respect of certain glaring
instances of encroachment. The report of the Task Force
itself records that its efforts to recover encroached public
land were often defeated primarily on account of lack of
administrative will. Few such instances of this Task Force
going about its task and the sudden, calculated and
unlawful interferences that it witnessed may be noted
below:
28. This Task Force had conducted a very detailed investigation
in respect of encroachments in Gollahalli village, Anekal
Taluk, Bangalore Urban District. The Task Force report inter
alia states that a road was formed in the middle of a lake
land encroaching nearly 2 acres and 11 guntas of lake land.
When the Task Force had co-ordinated a team of people
from various departments to demolish the encroachments
therein on a particular day and the entire machinery of
people and tools from the Taluk office, Deputy
Commissioner’s office along and the members of the
Special Task Force were on the spot to carry out demolition
28
of such encroachments, the persons in illegal occupation of
such land came forth with an order of injunction, not from
any competent Court of law, but from the Hon’ble Chief
Minister of Karnataka to the effect that no action be taken
at all to remove any encroachments and that all
encroachments be left in place as they were.
29. The Petitioners respectfully submit that the aforesaid stay
order could have only been issued for the protection of
certain vested interests and not for any public good.
Obviously, such intervention was not merely illegal but had
the effect of sending out a loud and clear message to all
concerned that the Government stance against
encroachment of public lands was largely ceremonial and
nobody, including this dedicated Task Force was meant to
take the Government’s professed objective with any degree
of seriousness.
30. Thereafter, the Managing Director of the Karnataka Public
Land Corporation had requested the Chief Secretary of the
State through a letter dated 19-Dec-2009 for vacating the
stay Order/withdrawal of the directions given on 16-Dec-
2009. It would surprise the right thinking members of our
society that nothing ever came of the said request from the
said Government body to the Chief Secretary of the State. A
copy of the stay order issued by the Hon’ble Chief Minister
bearing No. MuMu/203/grutha/2009 dated 16-Dec-2009 is
produced herewith and marked as Annexure – C. A copy of
the letter dated 19-Dec-2009 addressed by the Managing
Director of Karnataka Public Lands Corporation Limited to
the Chief Secretary of the State of Karnataka is produced
herewith and marked as Annexure - D.
31. This Task Force had inquired into and found out multiple
instances of encroachment of forest lands by certain
plantation owners. Consequently, it had addressed various
29
letters to the concerned departments to take specific
remedial action. To the utter shock and dismay of any right
thinking citizen, the Secretary to the Chief Minister had
issued a note dated 19-Nov-2010 ordering that no
precipitative action be taken without considering all the
submissions or explanations of the alleged encroachers and
even thereafter, nothing was to be done until a final
decision was worked out by the Government.
32. The Petitioners respectfully submit that the aforesaid note
had been issued merely to benefit certain vested interests
and to stall the legitimate effort of the task force. A copy of
the aforesaid note bearing reference No. PSCM/3495/2010
dated 19-Nov-2010 issued by the Secretary to the Hon’ble
Chief Minister is produced herewith and marked as
Annexure - E.
33. Thus, the Petitioners respectfully state that the efforts of
the Task Force were repeatedly frustrated by such acts and
numerous other omissions of other Government agencies.
34. At this juncture, it is pertinent to submit that the
Government of Karnataka had set up 16 different task
forces such as the Knowledge Commission, Vision Group of
Karnataka 2020, etc. One of these 16 task forces was the
aforesaid ‘Task Force for Recovery of Public Land and its
Protection’. For reasons that still continue to surprise the
right thinking members of our society, the Government of
Karnataka, that is, Respondent No.2 published through a
Notification that the Task Force shall be disbanded with
effect from 04-Jul-2011 vide GO No.RD 897 LGB 2010. A
copy of the said order issued by Respondent No.2 bearing
number GO No.RD 897 LGB 2010 dated 04-Jan-2011 is
produced herewith and marked as Annexure – F. The
reasons apparently stated in the said Order were incorrect
to the very knowledge of the Government. All the same, the
30
other 15 task forces continued to remain in operation after
the disbandment of this Task Force although the work of
some of those Task Forces would have greatly benefited by
the continued operation of this Task Force. The action of the
Government of Karnataka in unlawfully disbanding the said
Task Force is an act that cannot be justified under the label
of ‘administrative discretion’ in view of the circumstances
that preceded such disbandment. If it was the intention of
the Government, in disbanding the Task Force, to relieve
the encroachers of their worries, anxieties and fears, the
Government may be said to have succeeded thereby. A
tabular chart detailing the various task forces/commissions
that were set up by the Government of Karnataka is
produced herewith and marked as Annexure - G.
35. This Task Force issued its Report on 30-Jun-2011 and titled
it as ‘Greed and Connivance’. This Report was duly
submitted to the Government of Karnataka on 04-Jul-2011.
(This report shall be referred to hereinafter as the ‘Task
Force Report’). However, the Respondent No.2 appears to
have declined to accept the Task Force Report on account
of alleged procedural irregularities. A copy of the Task Force
Report dated 30-Jun-2011 issued by the Task Force is
produced herewith and marked as Annexure - H.
36. After the submission of the Task Force Report, his
Excellency, the Governor of Karnataka took serious note of
the large scale encroachment of public lands and addressed
a letter on 13-Sep-2011 to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of
Karnataka inquiring into the steps taken by the Government
of Karnataka towards the implementation of the
recommendations in the Task Force Report. It was reflected
in the said letter that the loss to the public exchequer on
account of such encroachment of public lands is in the
amount of approximately Rs.1,95,000 Crores (Rupees One
Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Crores Only). A copy of the said
31
letter dated 13-Sep-2011 addressed by His Excellency, the
Governor of Karnataka to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of
Karnataka is produced herewith and marked as Annexure –
J.
37. The Petitioners have reliably learnt that His Excellency, the
Governor of Karnataka had inquired into and had also
instructed the Respondents to act upon the Report and to
take action for recovering encroached public lands. The
Petitioners have further reliably learnt that the following
three committees have been constituted thereafter, by the
Respondent No.2:
(i) Committee – Revenue Department, headed by
Secretary to the Revenue Department. The Petitioners
have learnt that whilst a meeting or two have been
conducted, no concrete steps have been taken so far.
(ii) Committee – Forest Department, headed by the
Principal Secretary, Forests, Environment and Ecology.
The Petitioners have learnt that no meetings have
been conducted by the Committee and that the Forest
Department is not even aware of the constitution of
such a Committee in respect of land grabbing.
(iii) Committee – Urban Development, headed by the
Secretary, Urban Development Department. The
Petitioners have learnt that no meetings have been
conducted thus far, by this Committee.
38. The Task Force Report and JLC Reports (both these reports
shall be hereinafter referred to as ‘Reports’) emphatically
state that despite various legal provisions for the protection
against encroachment and for removal of encroached public
lands, blatant encroachments of public lands have
continued primarily due to the intentional refusal or
indifference of various ‘competent authorities’. Between
intentional omission and indifference, these are the
32
intermediate factors at play - ignorance of proper legal
powers, lethargy, fear of consequences arising from vexing
those in power, aggressive interference by powerful
interests and last but not the least, collusion with
encroachers. The Task Force quotes the JLC Reports and
proceeds to state that the powers vested in various officers
are in fact, wasted on them.
39. The Reports state that the estimated value of the
encroachments in the Bangalore Urban District consisting of
the five Taluks of Bangalore North, Bangalore North
Additional, Bangalore East, Bangalore South and Anekal
Taluks, on a conservative estimate of Rupees One and half
(1.5) Crore per acre, on average, is Rupees Forty Thousand
(40,000) Crores.
40. The JLC Report enumerates the details of encroachment,
which is extracted herein below (in respect of Bangalore
Urban District):
Sl.No.
Name of the Department
Encroachment in acres
Approximate value in
Crores
1. Revenue
Department
9294.00 18,588.00
2. Bangalore
Development
Authority
2,878.20 5,236.25
3. Muzrai 38.09 165.55
4. a) Forest
b) Tank bed
719.34
219.20
1,877.08
5. Karnataka Industrial
Area Development
Board
33.22 66.44
6. Town Municipal 8.08 32.32
33
Councils/ City
Municipal Councils
7. Bangalore
Mahanagara Palike
7.08 46.00
8. Karnataka Housing
Board
34.08 152.00
9. Wakf Board 259.33 780.00
10. Housing Co-
operative Societies
86.19 170.00
11. Bangalore University 11.22 96.11
12. Transport
Department
3.31 18.00
13. Health Department
(NIMHANS)
3.20 25.00
14. Animal Husbandry
Department
45.00 100.00
15. Slum Clearance
Board
12.19 25.00
Total 13,614.37 27,377.75
41. The Reports states that the extensive growth of Bangalore
in the last 20 years has resulted in an exponential increase
in the value of land, consequently, resulting in extensive
encroachments of government land. Therefore, the Task
Force Report observes that Bangalore’s rapid development
has created a very lucrative real estate industry which has
beckoned an organised ring of specialists whose work is to
encroach upon Government and Public lands with the active
blessings and involvement of persons in power within and in
the vicinity of Bangalore. The extensive growth in the
Bangalore Urban and Bangalore Rural districts fuelled by
the high value of lands and availability of large area of
34
Government lands like gomal, gunduthope, tank-beds, parks
and civic amenities sites have led to their extensive
encroachments.
42. The JLC report observes that Bangalore Urban District
contains a large extent of erstwhile Inam lands which
became Government land after the abolition of Inams
(‘Inam lands’ were certain Government lands previously
bestowed to certain persons in return for their services to
the Government subject to the pleasure of the Government
and to the continued performance of such services. In the
decades following the 1950s, such inams were statutorily
abolished). However, erstwhile Inam lands which had
reverted to the Government such as community lands have
also been encroached upon.
43. Another observation made by the Task Force was the illegal
use of agricultural lands for non-agricultural purposes,
chiefly residential development. For instance, a company
called Epsilon Ventures Private Limited had knowingly
violated the various land use laws by proceeding to
construct expensive villas for wealthy customers without
regard to the land use laws in force. The Task Force had
addressed a letter on 29-Dec-2010 to the Deputy
Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, requiring the
Deputy Commissioner to enquire as to whether the project
had been undertaken with the requisite conversion from
agricultural use to other uses in terms of the Karnataka
Land Revenue Act, 1964 and the Karnataka Land Reforms
Act, 1961. Thereafter, the Tahsildar undertook a personal
inspection and after according an opportunity to the
promoters to state their response, wrote on 05-Aug-2011 to
the Deputy Commissioner. The report of the Tahsildar
indicates that public land measuring 2 acres and 16.5
guntas had been encroached upon therein. The report
further states that structures have been constructed on an
35
approximate area of 12 acres and 4.14 guntas without the
requisite land/non-agricultural conversion. The Petitioners
submit that despite such report as aforesaid by the
Tahsildar, no action has been taken by the Respondents to
safeguard such public lands. The Petitioners most
respectfully submit that the aforesaid events amply
demonstrate a clear lack of administrative will in taking
prompt and effective action for the recovery of encroached
public land and that there are vested private interests which
have been successfully operating against public interest. A
copy of the said report dated 05-Aug-2011 is produced
herewith and marked as Annexure – K.
44. The Task Force, in its report, also makes certain findings
about the auction procedure followed by the Revenue
Department to dispose off public lands. Taking upon certain
concrete cases, the Task Force has stated that
advertisements about the auctions were not wide enough.
And that holders of General Powers of Attorney and the
same agent representing multiple bidders were unlawfully
permitted to participate in such auctions. Inevitably, such
transgressions have easily led to collusion, rigging and
cartelisation. For instance, the Report speaks of the case of
one bidder by the name of Sri Yousuff Shariff. The total
extent of lands auctioned by the Deputy Commissioner for
Bangalore Urban district between 2005 and 2009 and
thereafter confirmed by the Government is 643 acres. This
auction had fetched to the Government, a sum of Rs.540/-
Crores (Rupees Five Hundred and Forty Crores only). Of the
auctioned 643 acres, 283 acres have been confirmed in
favour of one person, Sri Yousuff Shariff making him the
single biggest beneficiary of such auctioned lands. The Task
Force Report also states that Sri Yousuff Shariff acted as the
same general power of attorney holder for multiple bidding
companies such as Umrah Brothers, Afnan Developers, Hill
36
Land Properties, MVR Securities and Top Notch
Infrastructure – a factor that all bidding processes
fundamentally prohibit. As stated in the Report, the Task
Force had brought this irregularity to the notice of the
Principal Secretary of Revenue Department and Chief
Secretary of the State of Karnataka vide letters dated 04-
Oct-2010 and 05-Oct-2010 but to no avail.
45. The Petitioners state that lack of administrative will for
taking swift and prompt action in respect of land grabbing is
further demonstrated by the following other acts described
in the Reports:
46. The Reports state that the Bangalore Development
Authority (referred to hereinafter as ‘BDA’, for short) does
not even maintain an updated Property Register for reasons
best known to it and is therefore, is no position to
accurately ascertain the total extent of encroachment of
lands within its jurisdiction. Still, of the BDA’s own estimate
of Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty Nine (2,739)
acres under encroachment, it has been able to recover not
more than a meagre Twelve percent (12%) or Three
Hundred and Thirty Three (333) acres of land after the
formation of the Joint Legislature Committee in 2006. A
conservative market value estimate of such encroached
upon land has been estimated by the Task Force at a
staggering amount of Rupees Eleven thousand Crores
(Rs.11,000/- Crores). The Report records inter alia the
following inadequacies and failures of the BDA to act in
accordance with its statutory duties and employ its
statutorily given powers:
(i) BDA, like so many other departments and local bodies,
does not even maintain an updated Property Register.
In the absence of such a register, the BDA is often
37
clueless and unable to ascertain the complete extent
of the encroachment of its land;
(ii) BDA has often failed to insist upon the statutorily
mandated earmarking of 45% of layout area (15% for
parks, 10% for civic amenities site and 20% for roads).
As such, by disregarding its statutory obligations, the
BDA is neither taking a firm stand on relinquishment of
these sites by erring layout developers nor does it
insist prior to approving distribution of sites that the
private layouts should fence and handover public
purpose lands to the BDA;
(iii) The Reports further opine that the functioning of BDA
has been hampered by ineffective legal services
availed by it;
(iv) The Reports state that de-notification of acquired land
has also added to the woes of BDA. The Reports
record myriad instances of de-notification of civic
amenities sites. The Task Force Report indicates that
about Two thousand eight hundred and thirteen
(2,813) acres have been de-notified and that in almost
all cases of de-notification, the Government has not
observed the pertinent rules; and
(v) The Task Force Report also records the inefficiency of
the Revenue Department in auctioning reclaimed
Government land.
Forest Land.
47. The Task Force Report states that the total geographical
area of Karnataka State is 1,90,498 square kilometres. Of
this, 30,718 square kilometres are classified as forests. This
is equivalent to about Seventy Six (76) Lakh acres of forest
lands in the State. According to the details furnished by the
Forest Department, an area of one lakh sixty five thousand
seven hundred and ninety six (1,65,796) acres are under
38
encroachment. This shows a colossal failure on the part of
the Central and State Governments in the enforcement of
the Indian Forest Act, 1927, the Forest Conservation Act,
1980, the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and the significant
Orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Forest case, WP
(C) No.202 of 1995. Further, the encroachment of more
than 60% of the Forest lands occurs in the ecologically
sensitive Western Ghats, one of the 18 ecological hotspots
in the world.
48. The Task Force Report has reported the helplessness
expressed by the concerned officials and their inability to
remove encroachments by influential persons. For example,
there is an encroachment of about 60 acres of forest land in
the border area between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh in
Janagalkunte forest by a former Speaker of the Karnataka
Legislative Assembly. Despite an order dated 30-Mar-2007
passed by the Assistant Conservator for the removal of
encroachment, the matter could not proceed any further as
the said order was appealed before the Conservator.
Thereafter, the Conservator had ordered for joint
measurement of the encroachment by a team of officials
from the Forest and Revenue Departments vide his order
dated 16-Jul-2008. However, the joint inspection was
expectedly obstructed by persons eager to retain the
encroachment and the inspection team was not even
allowed to enter into the area. The Task Force then found
out that those very lands had already been surveyed in
detail by Forest surveyors and encroachment stood
established by clear maps that were available. In further
turn of events, the alleged encroacher had approached this
Hon’ble Court and the Task Force was of the bonafide
impression that the alleged encroacher did misrepresent
the relevant facts to this Hon’ble Court. Thereby, an Order
came to be passed by this Hon’ble Court on 16-Dec-2010
39
directing one more survey of the lands in question.
Accordingly, another exhaustive survey took place and
expectedly, confirmed the fact of encroachment. The matter
has since been held up in the Courts.
49. The Reports outline the following reasons for the extensive
encroachments and the inability of the forest department to
effectively deal with such encroachment:
(i) Although 7,846 forest offence cases have been booked
under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘Forest Act’), Orders have been passed
only in 1,193 cases by the Assistant Conservators of
Forests despite considerable number of years lapsing
after the registration of such cases. Thereafter, most
such orders accomplish nothing as they are routinely
challenged before the Conservators of Forests;
(ii) The JLC Report records instances of encroachment in
Turahalli Minor forest, Bannerghatta National Park and
Bangalore Urban Forest Division. JLC Report further
recommends action impugning criminal negligence
against concerned Forest Department Officials.
50. The Petitioners further state that there are numerous
instances galore of encroachment by large landholders and
such encroachments are in respect of large areas. A Report
indicating encroachment of areas exceeding 10 acres in the
Chikmagalur forest division and the Bhadra Wildlife division
is produced herewith and marked as Annexure – L. A
perusal of this report would leave no manner of doubt that
with extensive information already available on all aspects
of encroachment in regard to such forest lands, the only
element that is lacking to remove such encroachments is an
ordinary effort by the Government officers.
40
51. The Petitioners further state that a large number of such
encroachments are made by persons in positions of power
in active connivance with law enforcers. A copy of a news
report indicating encroachment by former speaker of the
Karnataka Legislative Assembly Sri K.R.Ramesh Kumar is
produced herewith and marked as Annexure – M.
Lakes, Water Bodies and Storm Water Drains
52. The Task Force Report states that there are about 38000
lakes in Karnataka. In Bangalore Urban District alone, there
were about 600 lakes. As some lakes fell under two
adjoining survey numbers belonging to two different
villages in the revenue records, the number of lakes in
Bangalore Urban District has been shown as 937. The JLC
report states that in 1961, there were 262 water bodies in
Bangalore City area. These water bodies have become the
first casualty of illegal layout formation, rank trespass,
blatant encroachment and sanction by various departments
of the State and Central Government to put up construction.
The reasons for such encroachment are stated in the Report
as under:
(i) Lakes and tank beds have been encroached upon by
builders, shopkeepers, hoteliers, layout makers and