-1-
IN we HIGH comm" OF KARNATAKA AT A
DATED was THE 9*" mayor? JtJNE 2 V
BEFORE3.-.V__ T *
THE I-!ON'BLE MRJUSTICE 'iu§ C;}i4AN. $HA:x§TAi§}{GdUDA£i
WRIT .o§'%2oo74 (Ku:2.t2§§.)
1.
Hanumanthéffgfia _
S10 1atp&..
Agricu1t:11ist ». ‘ é .
Aggd. a.b;ii:t_ ‘E§51.:3§e_a1’s_ V’ ”
2. Halgshappa” _
9/ o *BheemapPaj. J ~ ‘
fisgxiculturist %
abd-ut 53V V ‘ ”
Rlagfiaraiiahaili
(3ham1agir.iTaluk
Thflafiajgiagerfiz ?’;)is11-ict. “Petitioners
R”1;I.iYrV:ag(3wda, Adv. J
VA » A1,; The beputy Commissioner
” Davanagcm District
Davanagere.
u The Assistant Commissinner
Davanagere Sub–Divisi.<3n,
Davanagcxc District.
– 3 –
unauthorised occupation. The said proposal was
The pubiic at large objected for $11-::.h grant on
the land in question belongs to Forest Deparftjneiltv
the order vide An11exure–i-I, the Aesistant’ ~f.3_oo1;z;iSé’gio3f:,er
rejected the prayer of the petifioneis lib: Iegj1’1I;?:Jffii.:~s£3§tion. “Vr”§’i11e
said ortier is confirmed jthe flepoty Cooofiissioner,
Davanagere District, «the order iiétefiv 3.10.2006,
vide Annexure-J. Thierafrit questioning the
oxder passed Degewuty’ Cnmfiifissioher ride Annexureni.
below have concluded that the
land in qrie*5_f{ionx.i$_ o7fo1e.:_’S”{ land. “e,3he forest law} cannot
V. «_ for other than the forest as is clear from
‘ .Vp1’o§rioiozoS; Forest Protection Act, 1980. A circular is also
H iseoedvV.Vb§t”_”L:the.”State Government prohibiting the ofiaoials to
regularise the forest lands. In View of the same, this
{foes not fmti any error in the impugned order. Both the
‘olrtlioxities below are justified in rejecting the prayers of the
jietitioners for reg1_1laI’isation of unauthorised occupation. as the
V’
-4-
land in question is a forest land. Hence, writ petition and
the same. is dismissed accnrdingly.
sd A
“bk/’ ban