{"id":159942,"date":"2009-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009"},"modified":"2016-04-20T12:01:27","modified_gmt":"2016-04-20T06:31:27","slug":"bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & Shantanagoudar<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF 'AUGUST. 2001\nPRESENT\n\nTHEHON'BLE MR. P.V. REDDI, CHIEF JUSTICE  3 \u00ab A\n\nAND\n\n'THE HoN'BLE MR. JUSTICE-N:K;*PATTL  Vf   A\n\n. 1sgsz\/93 and ggza-34\/1993   \nBE'|'WEEN: 0N.P.No.'32252!\u00a78) k \n\nSri. G.K. Govinda Rao, \u00bb __ '-\nProfessor' of English (Retd.)  '\nNo.161.(Upstairs), '- _ f\n36-ACross.7\"'B|ock,*    *\nJayanagar.     \u00bb\nBangalore-560 O82, 5;; A_  ~ \u00ab\n\n' (Bysn. K. GopaIAvA!*?;5B\u00e9\u00bbe::7'%}~dV;\/3% '-  '\n\nN\" V4\n\nfor petr.)  \"\"\"  -  _ V _\n1. State' of K\u00e9rnataxa 'by A  A \n\n|t\u00a7 Chief Secretary; \" \"\nVidh\u00e9aha Soudha,'  . _____ H . '\n\n Kamataka_\u00abState_ Federation of\nAdvocates'f'_Asso\u00a2ia\ufb01on (Regc_l_.)\nRepresented by its Chairman\nK.N; Subba 'Raddy. A\n\nA A 4-\" A  BW_SSB',\" Dauvery Bhavan.\n' \u00ab  Bangalore-9.\n\n .BYi'x\u00e9 Secretary - C.A.O. .\n(By Sri. H.C. Raveendranath -Adv for R.2. V\n\nA  Esra. M.G. Kumar -- Adv. for R33 and l.A.V!I.\n\nSrl. Amaranath -- Adv. for l.A.l|\/2000\n\nM341 ggrmous ug\u00a7.32232\/A95,1A9s41$-TAT      A\n\n\n\nSri. M.H. Motigi -- Adv. for R.3 and |.A.V|\nSri. MohanRao.M.S. - Adv. for R.2 & l.A.|V\nSri. A.N. Jayaram -- A.G.and\n\nSri. V. Sudish Pai -- AGA. For R.1.\n\nSri. M.R. Shailendra - Adv. for l.A.lX.\n\nBETWEEN: (\\N.P-.No. 1.9541\/99)\n\nSri. Bimal N. Desai.\nS\/o. N.H.Desai,\nAged about 41 years.\nNo.51 ,SJP Road,\n\nBangalore-560 002.       A\n\n(By Sri.M.G. Kumar -- Adv.for Petr.) 1'  ' _V\n\n'1 AND\n\n1. State of Karnataka, H\nByitschiefseqsretary,   _  -  '\nVldhana       \nBangaloro~5600(3l1 'V       .\n\n2. Union__ofTlnidia,\"' '\u00ab:.,__ _ \" _ \"  \nMinistry of\ufb01nviron  ant 8: Forest, \nByit'*.--svV_Se9:::--'eta'r$\"~..\"'~-.,   ' -\nNo.10. Paryavaran Bhavam  \nC.G.0.GompIex\",\u00bb  .  '\n\nNew Delhi\"... * V  '\n\n -  3.  Di;ectof\"ofvHorticuuure,\n\" , Cubbon Pack,\n'  'BarfAag.\u00bb:-;4Ic':.'oA-5x60..o01.\n\n :'BangHaVlou2*\u00a7g  Supply & Sewerage Board.\n\n  \n\nBy its Chairman,\nNc.19,.Cross,\nVasanthnagar,\nBangalore-560 O32.\n\n. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,\n\n Aranya Bhavan,\n\n' Mal|eswaram.18\"' Cross,\n\nBangalore-560 003. .. RESPONDENTS\n\n(By Sri. A.N. Jayaram -A.G.\nand Sri. V. Sudish Pai -- GA -- for\nR.1, R.3 and R.5)\n\n\n\nsn. S.N. Keshava Murthy - Adv. for R.4)\n\nBETWEEN: ' \u00a7_\\A_I,P.No.18287\/98)\n\nSri. Bimal Desai,\n\nS\/o.-- Natubhai H. Desai,\nAged about 41 years, .\nOcc: President (Operations)\nDesai Brothers (P) Ltd.,\nNo.51, SJP Road,\n\nBangalore-560001.     \n\n(By Sri. M.G. Kumar - Adv. for Petr.)\nAND   A\n\n1. State of Kamataka, .\n(Department of Horticulture',\u00ab-- --_\nVidhana Soudha, ' ' \" '\nBangalore-560 O01 .  H A _ A\n\n. 2. Deputy Director e\u20acHortidulture.\"    ~ \n\nCubbon Park\" ..  \"       \u00bb\ntBangalore\u20ac-56'O'\u00a3)01 \u00bb  '\n\n3. Kamataka Goxfemrnent Segretariatblub,\nBy itszseeretaryr-g\u00ab~.._\u00bb    -- .\n\nCubbdn Park, . \u00ab.    \nBangaloref580  1  '  RESPONDENTS A\n\n(By Sri. Ma..skar;un.es. Am}. for R.3.\n  $_'t'i}.A.NV. Ja_yaram'~:V.A..G. and .\nA     err. v. 'SVud_ishA_Pai -- AGA - for Respts.\n.A ;_v_vE% .P.Nos.8428-8434\/98) A  \n   W.P. 0 8\/98 E\n\n_ Age\"; Major,\n\" V. S\/o'; Venkateshappa,\nA  _ Dec: Pani Puri Stall.\n\" * \" Near Museum Park,\nRlat. No.204, Double Road,\n4\"' Cross, Lalbagh Road, A .\nBangalore-27. _ .. PETITIONER\n\n\n\n j1._'_:Bangai_orVe-2?.\n\nBangalore-560 046.\n\n,4\"' Cross. ammachamna Gordi;\n\nW.P.No.8429\/98\n\nSyed Gaffar. .\n\nAge: major,\n\nOcc: Cotton Candy Stall,\n\nNear Rani Circle. %\nR\/at. No.133, Old Pensioners Mohalla.\n\nMysore Road.\nBangalore-1 8.\n\n\ufb02.P.No,8430\/9\u00a7   & \n\nMohd. Haneef.\n\nAge: Major.\n\nSlo. M. Masta Sab,\n\nOcc: Cold-drink's Cart,\n\nNear Bal Bhavan Railway Gate,  '\n\nR\/at.No.41\/B.2\"' Cross, ' V  _ ._ e .\n\nChinnappa Garden,  ~   1, ;    '\n-- _..  PETETICNER\n\nW.P.No;3431Lg_\u00a7=:_ 3; \nShantamma. 5 \" '\nOcc:PanipuriSIal|,  ---    '-\nNearBalBhav_an'in fro\";tof'\u00a5-: \nRai|wayGate.i __ .     .\nR\/at, No.229, Do_ub!e Road,\"  _  \"\n\nLalbagh Road, \nBangalore-27. \u00bb _\n\nV V = Z,\/,\"\\\\\"\ufb02-npn\ufb02' o,8e\u00a7z\u00e9 H \ufb02v\nSnni\\7a.\\s}' .   --    \n\n Age: ma:jo'r,--,_  \nQ '=8\/o. Venkataramanappa,\n Occ: Cucumber; Fruit Stall,\n. ..  No.42, Sam\n\nK V A V ngi Ram Nagar,\n4thMairrR.o_ad..'5 Cross. _\nPETITIONER\n\n\ufb02.P.No.8433@\u00a7\n\n.eAma;nsyea,\n\n Age: major, V\n\nZ ' A o J  Cotton Candy stau,\n' Near Railway Gate.\n\nBal Bhavan,\n\nPETITIONER    '\n\nPETITIONER \"\n\n\n\n5\n\nR\/at. No.133, Old Pensioners Mohalla,\nMysore Road,\nBangalore-18. .. PETITIONER\n\n> yl_I_,P.Ng.8434128\n\n7. Sampangi.R.,\nAge: major,\nS\/o. Ramalah,\nOcc: Tiffan Stall on cycle.\nBehind Museum.\nR\/at. 121\/2. lll Block,\nThyagarajanagar,\n\nBangalore-560 028. ..  n V  --  ii.-\"E1'.l_\":l'4l.(')'l~lEi-\"'v.\" f  ; A'\n\n' (By M\/si. Sawant & Sawant--Adv.Vior:'i==etrs.)A'V'  . '    \n\nAND\n\n1. Commissioner of Pollcer\"  \nBangalorecity, \" V\nBangalore-1.  \n\n2- Deputv Dire~%'i\u00b0f  1 i ll \nCubbon P:ark,_.-  .   V'\nBangalore-1 ' V1.,__ V\n\n3. Asst;:Commiss\u00a7oner'of Police, -- I\nTraf\ufb01oqsub Division}.   _.\nVidhanaV.Soudha=,. * *\nBangalore'----1. -\n\n . A 4. ln\u00e9pect\u00e9r of P\u00a7Iice.lr ooooo 14 .\n . Cubbori Park Police Station.\n\n' _ V 'Kasturba Reid,\n\n5.'  Uireotor.' \nKarnateka Government Museum,\nVenkatappa Art Gallery,\n\n   * Kasturba Road. V '\n'   _ . Bangalore. .. RESPONDENTS\n\n *  Sri. A.N. Jayaram - A.G.'--\n\nand Sri. V.S. Sudish Pai - AGA -\n_for Respts.)\n\n\n\n'ix\n\n6 .\n\n, Writ Petition No.32232I98 is \ufb01led under Article '226 of the\nConstitution of India praying that this Court be Pleased to quash the\nimpugned noti\ufb01cation dated 30.7.1998 issued' bythe respondent-\nStat\u00e9 Government under sub-sections.(1) and (2) of Section 3 of\nthe Kamataka Government Parks (Preservation) Act, 1975.\n\n. Writ Petition No.19541l99 ls \ufb01led under Article 226 of7the._\nConstitution' oflndia praying that this Court be pleased to ci'eciare_ 7.,\n\nthe whole of Cubbon Park area as per the noti\ufb01cation ANN-'d .AN_D~ ;_. \n\nMap Ann-E, as -Forest Land subject to the Restriction..gVan'd . t \n\nProtection under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980...  _ pi = '\n\nWrit Petition No. 18287\/.998 is \ufb01redtluihderfhhttgieat 226 orthe' T \nConstitution of India praying that this Court'-be :ple~aised~to\"direct the  \nrespondents to restore the playground land in wiongfulypossessio\u00abn  '\n\nofR.3 to the Cubbon Park. __ 'V V _ V __\nWrit Petitions Nos. 8428 to  are \ufb01led tinder Ztrticles\n\n5 226' and 227 of the Constitution of India';-.rayirtg._ that this Court be\n\npleased direct the respondent .N_os._ 1,:2,3,'4\u00ab_and't5 by restraining\n\n9 them not to interfere in the hawkingti'busines$t..ot'*the petitioner\naround Cubbon Park and Bal Bhavan and;<_3ovt. Museum. And etc.,\n\nThese Writ for 'preiiminary hearing\/final\nhearing this day, '_THE'1'_HGNj'3|,..EV iii-liEF,V_JUSTlCE made, the\nfollowing:   ' '   ._  '  ' V '\n\nJfhese Writ"i'Petitions: are filed by way of Public interest\n\n  No. 32232198 has ' been taken up suo motu y\n\n  of the letter sent by Sri. G.K. Govinda\n _Raoiwho is' a -resident of Jayana_gar,V Bangalore. The other Writ'\n\n' " 'A"--..Petitlons iare\ufb01led as P|Ls byvarious other persons. In all' these\n\nA   Petitions, the Noti\ufb01cation dated i30.7.1_9'9'8 issued in purported\n\n\n\n-\n<\/pre>\n
exercise of power under Sub-‘section (1) 8. (2) of Section 3 of the<\/p>\n
Kamataka Govemment Parks (Preservation) Act, 1975 (hereinafter<\/p>\n
i referred to as ‘the Act’) has been questioned. Directions haveV.al?soe.. ‘<\/p>\n
been sought for to preserve and maintain Cubbon Park <\/p>\n
extent as speci\ufb01ed in the notiiioation dated 27.9.1933) njotto i it  <\/p>\n
allow any structures adjacent to Legislatrlirsl lflome”.and  <\/p>\n
Central Government organisation)  _ L<\/p>\n
2. The impugned notitication tvas*iissued.in supersession of
\nthe noti\ufb01cation dated 27.9.1953. ;_’Th’e..t:ioii\ufb01catit)it..dated 27.9.1983
\nwas issued under theisame provisiens.:ln.}ngdi\ufb01czatiVon of the earlier<\/p>\n
Government    these noti\ufb01cations<\/p>\n
– purport to V)sp.ec_’rfy,..fbrt1_e._pdrposes et:$_e{‘:tion :3 of the Act,.lands<\/p>\n
and building within ‘the::..I:in:its”elithe park known as Cubbon ‘Park<\/p>\n
(renamed as  iChamaraiendra.’l5ark). The situation and limits of<\/p>\n
 that pari\u00a7are.speci\ufb01ed reference to the boundaries given in the<\/p>\n
    and substance, by the second noti\ufb01cation of<\/p>\n
 was included within the limits of park and by<\/p>\n
it  the third no_ti\ufb01cati’on._(lmpugned noti\ufb01cation) dated 30.7.1998, _a part<\/p>\n
‘ ”  thegsaldvatea was deleted. At this stage, it may be pointed out<\/p>\n
it  gititatithetevare two noti\ufb01cations of the same date. By the second,<\/p>\n
‘ V’  dated 30.7.1998, the LRDE park area of about 17 acres<\/p>\n
  .f'(other than 1.75 acres), which was excluded) bv the \ufb01rst noti\ufb01cation, ‘<\/p>\n
was tagged onto the park. The net result of the two noti\ufb01cations<\/p>\n
M i ‘V , \\<\/p>\n
-s
\nissued on 30.7.1998 including the impugned noti\ufb01cation of the<\/p>\n
same date is that nearly 30 acres has been deleted from the limits<\/p>\n
of Sri. Chamarajendra Park Area. To be more speci\ufb01c, the areas.<\/p>\n
deleted are those constituting the premises of Raj Bhavan\ufb02and<\/p>\n
Legislators’ Home and a small portion of LRDE Premises-;;”* I     <\/p>\n
3. The Karnataka Government;\n<\/p>\n
1975 is a short enactment with_.four secticns.   reie’rtovi*\u00bb.,’<\/p>\n
Sections 3 and 4.\n<\/p>\n
“Section 3: Application of-the A_.c:lt:\u00ab-f(1);’l_’hls Act
\nshall apply to all the lands. andgbuildingstvithin the
\nlimits of. such llarks _jbelong’i_ng  the State
\nGovernifner\ufb02pas the State G_over’nirien’t may, from
\ntime.-its titne\ufb02ey notifF:cation”–‘in’*’the._official Gazette,<\/p>\n
 it ‘A(2)t.5The.ttotif4,:a”tii\u00a7n referred to in sub-section
\n<(1)–. shall  -~n'e'arly as possible. the
\nsituation and'li.ifnits'of_sucn parks. .<\/p>\n
,  Section "i4:._Presevwation of Parks:- (1) It shall be
\n the duty of thestate Government to preserve and<\/p>\n
. 3 maintain as horticultural gardens the parks to
\nT 1; "which"this– Act is applicable and take such action
\n' * " . "as'~:n_ayjbe" necessary to improve the utility of such<\/p>\n
pari'-.'sj_as' such gardens. i<\/p>\n
..  _(2) No land or building within the parks to<\/p>\n
x T which this Act is applicable shall be alienated by
\n way of sale, lease, gift, exchange, mortgage or<\/p>\n
5 otherwise or no licence for the use of any such
\nland or building shall be granted and any
\nalienation made or , licence granted in
\ncontravention of this section shall be null and<\/p>\n
void:\n<\/p>\n
ea<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
Provided that the restriction under this sub-
\nsection to lease shall not apply in the caseof
\nbuildings existing on the date of coming into force
\nof this Act.”\n<\/p>\n
4. Obviously, the said Act was enacted with the laudable<\/p>\n
objective of providing parks and open spaces so as to create””‘* T’
\nhealthy and eco-friendly atmosphere apart from T provldin\u00a7.VV V 1:.\/.11′
\nrecreational facility to the public. The buildings  ae’\u00ab_Hig_nf
\nCourt, Vldhana Soudha, Legislators’ Home, Raj  Tennis  A’ V
\nStadium etc., LRDE campus with sunoundirlg’.\u00bbareas’were <\/p>\n
included in 1983 noti\ufb01cation. in this~..a_rea_,\u00b0there’ji3Vi”Va.tradition’ai <\/p>\n
park which is popularly known as ‘Cubbcn
\ndeveloped as horticultural , la~ridscapre’_A  _:’gard\u00e9n’.’_j_e. it is’: common
\nground that the objectofAct’:isI_Vept’~~to’toucl-i.__or affect the<\/p>\n
existing buildings rcri–structuresI::and  ideveioppairks in place of<\/p>\n
those structures. it is = agreed”bygjall.-the::_ccunsel that the idea is to
\npreserve open spaceareund _these.:’:i’rnportant buildings. The<\/p>\n
rhistoryVofeCubb\u00e9i:n’VPark whiichais said!-lo be the pride of the City and<\/p>\n
a prirrie faciiityto thegresidents and tourists, has been narrated in<\/p>\n
some ofltlle   in the statement of objections tiled
\nVlri–:’lllliP,No.32232\/98′ by Government. The question before us.<\/p>\n
V   the__dimuriition of the area noti\ufb01ed as an area withinthe
\nV  by virtue of the impugned noti\ufb01cation (\ufb01rst
\n Edated 30.7.1998 is violative of any of the provisions of<\/p>\n
\ufb01je”af\u00a7rememioned act or any other statutory or constitutional<\/p>\n
provisions such as Article 21 of the Constitution. There can be no<\/p>\n
gm\/’<\/p>\n
10<\/span>
\ngain saying that the impugned noti\ufb01cation of 1998 was aimed at<\/p>\n
facilitating two important constructions:<\/p>\n
(I) an annexe building to the Legislators’ Honrgg; .. ._<\/p>\n
(ii) construction of ground ‘level reservoir’. <\/p>\n
premises forfacilitatlng supply of   <\/p>\n
According to the details fumlshed by learned g.\u00a7dxrocate,’vGlerreral..g –
\nappearing for the State, an extenbof about ‘shatter:-acre is needed
\nfor construction of additional”””blecire”‘within the “premises of l<\/p>\n
. Legislators’ Home includlingtlhel pr3p:osed’Vccnstruction adjoining the<\/p>\n
quadrangle. Asifar. as the water reservoir’ is: concerned, as already<\/p>\n
noted, 11$’  ‘required_fo_rithegsame. In the process of<\/p>\n
constructions? liegls|ators?_:VHorne,..a.’5out 3_0 Ashoka trees have to
\nbe  and lnV”Vt\ufb01\u00a2.. construction of ground-level water
\nresewoir,4_someV”old”Atrees”_.numbering about 15, according to the<\/p>\n
counsel for  have to be cut. it is stated in the counter-<\/p>\n
  ‘ lieu of the trees felled, more number of trees will be
\n    ‘around the place and it is stated that even after the
\nAconstruction of the ground level water reservoir, the park area will<\/p>\n
 AA . be developed and nourished. The inevitable need for making such<\/p>\n
is ‘  \u00ab.cor’rstructions is pointed out in the statement of objections and in
\n the course of arguments advanced by the learned Advocate<\/p>\n
General. The Advocate General points out that the exclusion of the i<\/p>\n
area is practically miniscule and it constitutes 3 to 4 percent of the<\/p>\n
total area earlier noti\ufb01ed and there willnot be further coverage of<\/p>\n
\ufb02.\n<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
open area for any purpose. The learned Advocate-General<\/p>\n
stressed that the Government is conscious of preserving and<\/p>\n
developing the Cubbon Park, leaving in tact as much openvare_-alas”<\/p>\n
possible.\n<\/p>\n
5. The arguments on the legal front bygthel  counisel’, if if<\/p>\n
V appearing for the petitioners are brie\ufb02y statedithusz      <\/p>\n
The impugned notification “”otfends the ‘off the
\nKarnataka Government    i975. It is
\nsubmitted that the Govemment   the limits of the
\nCubbon Park ar:ea._;i:n’:facti;iAal  existence of such park,
\nhas no power: to”ofitheV_area. it is submitted that
\nneither   of \ufb02ae\ufb01eneral Clauses Act can be
\npressedivinto -thelland and building once notified.<\/p>\n
it is the obligation of  4Government to develop the entire<\/p>\n
 {area as”‘norticultural garden and to improve its utility as ,<\/p>\n
    the-..area is noti\ufb01ed, it cannot be taken away, that too,<\/p>\n
A i”‘by”a.n%  executive. Learned Counsel submit that the<\/p>\n
Act”doesgnotsontemplate the diminution of any area notified as a<\/p>\n
   Section 3. It is commented that what is done by the<\/p>\n
  –impugned noti\ufb01cation amounts to colourable exercise of power. it<\/p>\n
  at _,v_i_s\u00a7submitted that the exclusion is detrimental to the healthy<\/p>\n
\ufb01g\/\ufb02<\/p>\n
,<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
environment and results’ ln- further denudation of the park. The
\nnoti\ufb01cation is assailed as being ultra vires and repugnant to the
\nprovisions of the Act. By issuing the impuned noti\ufb01cation,gitgis<\/p>\n
submitted that the State government has taken 11\/)
\ndecision alien to the purposes of the Act and without
\nthe environmental needs of the City. Learnedicotinselptherefolre,
\nsubmitted that the noti\ufb01cation is liable to baattuckaat\u00e9za
\nground of violation of Articles 14 and 2.1′ of the %<\/p>\n
proposed constructions should not be_pe,rmitted thereon. vliearned
\ncounsel have drawn our attention to vamjsil decisions of the
\nsupremeCourt,viz.,._  ‘<\/p>\n
(i) BAN.GALertE’jaiviEDIC:AI;  3.35 MUDDAPPA AND
\nOTHERS (Ala 1991 sa.c.p1iao2)g.   i\n<\/p>\n
(ii) D.D.tvvAe.ANi2;.Q1HERs v; EGNHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT<\/p>\n
  AiJ’rHoRiTv. _’G’l.-lAZlAB_AD_ AND ANOTHER (AIR 1993
\nALl_AHABAD”597)_.’ A  A A<\/p>\n
(iii) M.C. ili1EljlTA.v._K’itllIi;-1L’.i’*lAil’H AND OTHERS (1997) 1 sec<\/p>\n
 ‘ A-(iv) .iVl.l_.—al:E’;UlLDEl\u00a7S PVT. LTD., v. RADHEY SHYAM SAHU AND<\/a>  <\/p>\n
_,  (.1 999) 6 SCC 464.\n<\/p>\n
 ln.Vsu’pport:of_..theirvatgument that the parks which are’ essential for<\/p>\n
 _ Vhealfny envlratiment and recreation, cannot be allowed to be
\n degraded. A reference has been made to particular<\/p>\n
  rpassages wherein the Supreme Court adverted to and expounded<\/p>\n
M,<\/p>\n
-13<\/p>\n
the environmental” principles, viz., precautionary principle,
\nsustainable development and Public Trust doctrine. One of the
\nlearned counsel has also relied on the provisions of the”‘Mysore<\/p>\n
Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeologicaliih’$ites’~;.’land<\/p>\n
Remains Act), 1961 and the Forest Conservation   M ”<\/p>\n
the learned counsel, the provisionsof Thea siaidi fl1avej’.be’en P<\/p>\n
violated by issuing the impugned notification} it Thex *  5<\/p>\n
Karnataka Parks, Play-\ufb01elds open i’spacesl_(Preservaiion and” V<\/p>\n
Reguilation) Act, 1985 have alsc—-heen”infringed,– vacceiiding to the<\/p>\n
learned counsel.\n<\/p>\n
6. \\[ve\u00a7’~are\u00a7j:ijLnable.\u00abto  ‘contentions of the learned<\/p>\n
counsel  We  say that the Government<\/p>\n
lacked the pee-er\u00aba1e\u00ab.anerl’the limits of the parks so as to diminish<\/p>\n
the areeonce   within those limits as per the Parks<\/p>\n
Preservation  of 1\u00a7?5ivor that such power has been exercised<\/p>\n
.1 it  _a”rbi:itr:ariAly and inviolation of the fundamental rights guaranteed.<\/p>\n
 and 121 of the Constitution. The undisputed facts<\/p>\n
in 1975 only the area West of Vidhana Veedhl (in<\/p>\n
betvveei: Vidhana Soudha and High Court), North of Nrupathunga<\/p>\n
”   West of Kasturba Road and South of Queen”s Roadand<\/p>\n
 Rajbhavan was noti\ufb01ed. It includes , the area in which the High<\/p>\n
m<\/p>\n
Court is situated and itialso includes the traditional Cubbon Park<\/p>\n
area more particularly known as ‘Cubbon Park’. In the year <\/p>\n
there was addition of much more area within the limits of parts:<\/p>\n
included Vldhan Soudha, Rajbhavan.’ Legislators’ Hom.e?.Li\u00a7D;Ej: \ufb01t   _<\/p>\n
premises and park. By issuing the impugned Noti\ufb01oation~_..in”~tl1eAV<\/p>\n
year 1998, part of the additional area to tt1e.;tune..4off’vabeut._30: acres it  as ‘ <\/p>\n
has been deleted, leaving the balaneeof about’24O  <\/p>\n
stands’ noti\ufb01ed as park area. ‘The”deleted_’area, as-already
\nincludes Rajbhavan, Legislators’~-Homelandla striper land to
\nan extent of 1.75 acres in LRDla’._  rThus, the area
\ndeleted is the one surreuridingA__Raibhavan ~.L\u00a7\u00a7t\u00a7slators’ Home in<\/p>\n
which the public”gerieraliy’3have–rio_’access-tothe parks or gardens %<\/p>\n
maintained s~the.-ems,  Gavernmegnteea obviously felt that the<\/p>\n
wholesale hart on   _.within the Rajbhavan and<\/p>\n
Legislators’ Home should’t.be’\u00ab:liited having due regard to the<\/p>\n
~ sharacteit,  andntopography of the land. By the Noti\ufb01cation of<\/p>\n
 enclosed . areas within the premises of Rajbhavan and<\/p>\n
Lelgislatorsi the public in general have no access<\/p>\n
V were ratherextravagan\ufb02y included within the limits of the park for . A<\/p>\n
i W H K  purposeof Government Parks (Preservation) Act, 1975, This<\/p>\n
 a__nor_nai’y* was rectified by issuing the Noti\ufb01cation in 1998, deleting a<\/p>\n
 ‘:’_4’part–of that area i.e., about 30 acres. As already noticed, the<\/p>\n
   apparent idea behind exclusion of this area falling within the<\/p>\n
rm<\/p>\n
premises of the said important buildings is to facilitate the
\nconstruction to the extent it is found absolutely necessary: If we<\/p>\n
I take stock of the subsequent-events. it transpires  ‘Ce:-‘-“ia_yss<\/p>\n
House has been constructed in Rajbhavan to hold.publicf<\/p>\n
with the permission of the Court. Construction hasvvalsotakeniaplace V’ r <\/p>\n
covering an area to the extent of 6.390  as=an~ the<\/p>\n
Legislators’ Home after obtaining..permission of   <\/p>\n
remains to be constructed accordiriig.:to the presentvlfplans, as stated
\nby the learned Advocate_C\u00a3ene:ral,;_covers.  area of about 19,500
\nsq.ft. (approximately abouthalf  acre)’. ‘ ‘balance or left out<\/p>\n
area even . after  of and lawns inside the<\/p>\n
Leglslatoris.v.is”sai:d:’:’to ..bev:Aabog;t”‘75%. Then, we have the<\/p>\n
areav’dear\u00a7mar!\u20aced for construction. of ground level water reservoir in _<\/p>\n
LRDE3parkV  \u00abacres; It is stated by the learned<\/p>\n
Advocate\u00e9eneral ‘,and’v_als6’iV the counsel appearing for BWSSB that<\/p>\n
   said area has”-been chosen particularly on the basis of the<\/p>\n
‘  committee as it was found to be more suitable<\/p>\n
”   of view’ of level, etc. it appears that already’ a<\/p>\n
groundllevel” water reservoir exists_ within that area forming part of<\/p>\n
 3  ‘L-RDE”iParl'<. Coming to theother side of the picture, about \ufb01fteen ' i<\/p>\n
 oldtrees have to be felled for the purpose of construction of GLW<\/p>\n
if Reservoir and about 30 Ashoka trees have to be cut off in the<\/p>\n
Legislators' Home premises. The open space to the extent of<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
 " is r'\u00e9cori:l'ed." ~ . g_<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
about ‘half an acre will be lost by reason of proposed completion of<\/p>\n
. the construction at Legislators’ home. We are only referring. to
\nthese subsequent events relating to proposed
\nconstructions only to highlight that the noti\ufb01cation  K
\n‘ area from the park limits has not been used’ ‘asalever <\/p>\n
to \ufb01ll up substantial portion of the .area.__vvlthA. ‘constifiictions.”   .<\/p>\n
overall public interest, especially,..t:’g:th.e augmentation “drinking_ ‘V<\/p>\n
water to the public has to be necessari’ly- keptgin view’;-.The drinking
\nwater supply is as importar’1ti__f not_Vr\u00a7iore as preservation
\nof trees. A statement has  on  of the learned
\nAdvocate General  vvill be planted both in
\nLRDE vpareavasww  illflornelpremises so that the loss
\nof.trees_ wouldglba-Vadequately”.compensated. He also states that
\nefforts will akengoaaalsaegiana maintain park in LRDE campus<\/p>\n
ever; after the construction of GLW Reservoir. The said statement<\/p>\n
V  regard to the facts _adverted to above including the
\n subseuuent events, and taking a holistic and pragmatic view, we
\nareurnot persuaded to accept the contention that the decision to<\/p>\n
i. ‘V:  delete the extent of about 30 acres from the ambit of the noti\ufb01cation<\/p>\n
issued under the Karnataka Government Parks(Preservation )Act is<\/p>\n
arbitrary nor can it be said to be an instance of colourable exercise<\/p>\n
of power.– We cannot accept the extreme contention advanced by<\/p>\n
the learned counsel for the petitioners that no part of the area once<\/p>\n
noti\ufb01ed can be deleted. We are unable to \ufb01nd any legal basishifor
\nthe argument that the power under Section 21 of the ”
\nGeneral Clauses Act cannot be invoked to vary altier ‘
\nnoti\ufb01cation by way of deletion or additionrvotarea.  counsel
\nfor the petitioners cited decisions reported
\n‘ and A.l.R. 1991 SC 1117 A to support:’tl1.eir’argurn’entii1 relvationsjto<\/p>\n
Section 21 of General Clauses Actffiie “ratio-\u00bbof the said decisions<\/p>\n
have absolutely no application  The language<\/p>\n
employed in section:”3.__1woi.{i_id’  V_froma:..Vsection 21 of the
\nKarnataka General.’__(\u00a7lauses’:_Act’, …lencis1fsupportV to the plea of the
\nState GoVe[nl\ufb01ent”tit.gt Vpiiarefiisjjpugneqy no\ufb01\ufb01ca\ufb01on is within their<\/p>\n
authorilyI;_ Se_ctioxn’l’limits of parks to be speci\ufb01ed by the<\/p>\n
. State Governrnent i’frorn”tirne’to”tinie”. The words connote that the<\/p>\n
donee pfpower can exercise such power not once but as and when<\/p>\n
 V. iitliey\u00e9occasion dernandsl llll mlihe speci\ufb01cation of limits of parks from<\/p>\n
 in addition or deletion but it cannot be<\/p>\n
contended.th’at:the power under section 3 can be resorted to only in<\/p>\n
 caseof “addition, but not deletion; The contention that the
\n \u00abI.  of area once noti\ufb01ed cannot be exercised by the Executive<\/p>\n
1′   isvequaliy untenable and has no legalbasis.<\/p>\n
W,<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
8. In the light of’ the factual scenario depicted above and<\/p>\n
the interpretation of section 3, we cannot sustainthe contention of i<\/p>\n
the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned<\/p>\n
noti\ufb01cation is’ ultra vires the power conferred to. the ~ V.<\/p>\n
under section 3 of the Government Parks (Presewa\ufb01on)_:Act’eor M<\/p>\n
the power has been exercised arbitrari!y;AA” The ‘_n’oti\ufb01cation_ _can–notx7;<\/p>\n
be said to offend any environmental  for<\/p>\n
When once the deletion of the.sarea-isconsidered tougbez ‘arbitrary<\/p>\n
_ or offensive of the provisions of VtheV:’Act;”git is n’ot-.opeh to the<\/p>\n
petitioners to invoke Article  an_cl\u00a7_:;that the impugned<\/p>\n
Noti\ufb01cation violatess’-the rightto envi’ronrt.-e\ufb01nt. The facts of<\/p>\n
the case as adveneiclfgito _above wouldjjrevealf\ufb01\ufb01fffthat the Noti\ufb01cation A<\/p>\n
‘ does not__have  ~ impinging on the<\/p>\n
fundamental  including the right to healthy environment
\nand recreation, ltisf not  that certain area reserved for<\/p>\n
development  has been diverted for a different purpose<\/p>\n
. if   to the. provisions of the existing law “. The area speci\ufb01ed to<\/p>\n
 :;._’be.}vittrinj:ihe  park at one point of time has been deleted for<\/p>\n
relevant  which cannot be said to frustrate per se the<\/p>\n
‘*..objects” ‘ithe Act. in this background, the decisions cited by the<\/p>\n
tiearned’ counsel for the petitioners expounding various<\/p>\n
‘  environmental principles for the promotion’ of healthy environment ‘<\/p>\n
if and ecological balance do not have much of relevance and<\/p>\n
lab”\n<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
therefore there is no need to advert to each of the decisions in<\/p>\n
detail.\n<\/p>\n
9. The learned Advocate General has contended..fthat-\u00ab V.<\/p>\n
‘ section 4 (2) of the Government Parks (Presewa\ufb01on)-\u00ab’:Act,jtheixe  <\/p>\n
no prohibition against constructions Tl7:e’iiprescriptiorp.cor:tained\u00a5inVi’3<\/p>\n
sub-section (2) of section 4, it is poin’tedi.~’.out, isin’ <\/p>\n
alienation by way of sale, lease. gifttjietct or againstyggrant.iofiicence ” A<\/p>\n
for the use of such land or bulldingA.i.–lnV:the ‘instant case, itis pointed
\nout that no licence to useland_vE\u00a7a:s}s been.:’ggranted to any third
\nparty. When oncef\ufb02rve impugraid  it upheld, it is not
\nnecessary to…   ‘Vvvhether the ban on<\/p>\n
constructions by  in Section 4. A<\/p>\n
1(i[l!lIe next’vturn’cur’*attention to other enactments referred<\/p>\n
to by;ti:e_|earned_’cou”nsei.  .Karnataka Parks, Play fields, and<\/p>\n
A it  .sp:ac’es”(Preservation and Regulation) Act, prohibits the use of<\/p>\n
 e.._p”ar_l<."  _j-open spaces speci\ufb01ed in the list published under'<\/p>\n
sectiyon  any purpose other than the purpose for which it<\/p>\n
'*.,was on the date of the commencement of the Act. Section 7<\/p>\n
Xiiml\ufb01ioses an obligation on the local authority tomaintain in a clean<\/p>\n
A  and proper condition the Parks, Play \ufb01elds and Open spaces<\/p>\n
 'belonging or vested in it and included in the list published<\/p>\n
M…\n<\/p>\n
under Section 4 or. 5. Section 8 prohibits constructionof any
\nbuilding or structurelikely to affect the utility of the ;vPark,’_~l?la\u00a7~’;_l5ield<\/p>\n
or Open spaces speci\ufb01ed in the list published ti.nd_\u00e9!. 4?’ at <\/p>\n
The obligation of the owner of Parks   <\/p>\n
list published under Section ,4_ or  but not vested inlvthevtlocaal<\/p>\n
authority, is laid down under Section 9. ‘There Ti-s no ayerment or’<\/p>\n
any material placed before usAthat’v..tiieVV’\u00e9ie_leted\u00e9areatalls within the
\nambit of Park oropen space inv–tiie:’ list: under section 4 or
\n5 of the Act, Thereforfeiwe need that further probe into this aspect.<\/p>\n
 \u00ab\u00ab\u00ab\u00ab ~1  tot the it provisions of Mysore Ancient and
\nHistorical a:td”‘Archeological Sites and Remains Rules<\/p>\n
1965. “we l\ufb01ndwit dit\ufb01cult’_.\u00bbetoVaccept the contention of the learned<\/p>\n
, that ~~thev’lanc:l which has been deleted by the impugned<\/p>\n
 is to be treated as an ancient monumentwithin the<\/p>\n
mean’inp_c\u00a7f’Vsection 2 of the Act. Moreover, we have no material to<\/p>\n
A “‘<4hoid_'"tiiat7"'it falls either under section 3 or section 4.. Section 3<\/p>\n
 x  contemplates that certain ancient and historical monuments and<\/p>\n
"  larcheological sites have been declared under the provisions of<\/p>\n
certain earlier Acts. Section 4 contemplates the Noti\ufb01cation to be<\/p>\n
issued by the Government. No such Noti\ufb01cation has been brought<\/p>\n
cm<\/p>\n
to our notice. Section 5 proyides for acquisition of rights in a .<\/p>\n
protected monument and the procedure by which it should be done'.<\/p>\n
No such acquisition of right has been brought to surf" <\/p>\n
Therefore, we \ufb01nd that the reference to the provisions-of the   _  <\/p>\n
Act is rather misconceived.\n<\/p>\n
12. Let us now see whether tl:e:’Forestvh\u00e9anseniationAct has
\nany application and the Notificationi’o1’feridsV’that Act. ‘ According to<\/p>\n
section 2 of the Act, no State _Cfaoyerninent’A’cr authority shall<\/p>\n
‘ make, except  _prio>:r”approval Central Government,<\/p>\n
any order directing soles: Lander portion thereof may<\/p>\n
, be used do not think that the land<\/p>\n
coverediby the hlo\ufb01\ufb01caticnyisituated in the heart of the City is forest<\/p>\n
land. There  inothiniginithedecision cited by the learned counsel<\/p>\n
for  petitloners’reported’ in A.l.R. 1997 SC3297 which supports ‘<\/p>\n
  inthis redard. The attributes and characteristics of<\/p>\n
 forest  by the’ Forest Conservation Act are utterly<\/p>\n
– lacking inythe. instant case.\n<\/p>\n
M’ .\n<\/p>\n
22o<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
‘ A reference has also been made to Sec.2_.1 of the Karnataka<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
Town & Country Planning Act. We do not understand how the said<\/p>\n
provision affects the validity of a noti\ufb01cation issued under Sec.3,’of_ A<\/p>\n
the Kamataka Government Parks (Preservation) Act,W jt ” <\/p>\n
_ Whetherany construction has been or is being made in violation:   ‘<\/p>\n
the Zoning ‘Regulations and the use to whichthe   to<\/p>\n
to ortbdf any building regulations are violatedjs 7.?
\n issue” in these writ petitions. Thei*efore, the’argument:”sought.to I
\nbe built up on the basis of Sec.21 or ‘_’gi7own_\u00bb& cmrygplannang
\nAct has to be rejected. V to A  ‘P V<\/p>\n
In view of    the validitylof
\nthegimpugned  and further decline to<\/p>\n
grant thegreliet ~proposed constructiong\ufb02for the<\/p>\n
‘purpose of* ground ._level_ -water reservoir and \u00abextension of<\/p>\n
Legislators Home;  V.\n<\/p>\n
V  : An. a,o:prehe:nsion has been expressed by the learned<\/p>\n
   coun7eel”%tor ‘1.petitioners that in future, there could be further<\/p>\n
 ‘noti\ufb01cations{deleting some_ more areas P and resorting to<\/p>\n
 I constructions over such areas and in course of time there is every<\/p>\n
 _ *–Atlikel’_i\u20achood of the’Cubbon Park area being diluted. ltis submitted<\/p>\n
\/mg<\/p>\n
that the preservation of lung space in a busy city and-
\nmaintenance of parks is essential for the health and recreation of<\/p>\n
the public and there is no guarantee that the Government will<\/p>\n
not resort to a subterfuge to overcome the provisions of the
\nGovernment Parks (Preservation) Act. Sharing the concern ol’~–._<\/p>\n
the Petitioners for preservation of as much open space”as”g*\u00ab._f:._’
\npossible and the need to develop _the parks, we direct__that  P.<\/p>\n
. further constructions (other than those referred to ‘.\u00a2_.l_.!.{_)l_;3’_).xVSi’A–‘l:all.._<\/p>\n
be made covering the open area within thebligmits of
\nspecified under the Notification of 199\u00a3_witnput iiobtaiiiiiiig :ne t.lj <\/p>\n
clearance from\ufb02proceedlng with g 5cc~nstructiona. ,._ 2<\/p>\n
The Writ Petitions are dismissed ‘subject to-.  above
\ndirection. No costs. ‘ V ‘  .      it<\/p>\n
The Legal Services Authorityfat*whesei~-reduetst; the learned
\nCounsel Mr.Gopai Hegde..has appeared’, ‘”a sum of .
\nRs.5′,0O0\/- as fee to him oet-“(if the fun'[cls’;cf::theV .Authoritv.<\/p>\n
  if  x W .\n<\/p>\n
K.\n<\/p>\n
P.N.g: lviarkllaiVcopy”of’vth’is Order to the Commissioner,Bangalore<\/p>\n
1g’Mahanaga~ra’h-Pali”keT’_~and'”the Bangalore Development Authority<\/p>\n
also.\n<\/p>\n
By Order<\/p>\n
\ufb01g<\/p>\n
._(_3_J__ 65 NKPJ<\/p>\n
4:\n<\/p>\n
W..P.32232\/1998<\/p>\n
25-11-2005 . T ‘ T 7
\nT ‘ ORDER ON _I.A.NO.lI2005 ‘<\/p>\n
By order dated 1d~8\u00a7200I this Court disposed of a   _<\/p>\n
petihons \ufb01led by way of puhlic interest litigations upholdiintjthe
\nof. the no\ufb01\ufb01cation dated 30th” Julny 1998′ issued’:   of  .
\nKarnataka $\u00a7;\u20acQi13iiBg the limits of Cubbon   ‘  3
\nhad expressed their apprehension I    .~fLi;I’\u00a3er’_’ ‘ dd
\nnoti\ufb01cations. iesued by the Government to   .A
\nd T-more areas from’.the’C11bbon    over such a
\n“areas in’ the course of    itself may get
\ndiluted. The  shared the “concern
\n‘_ of the petitionersvnforv  Q\ufb01eh spaceas .posg,jb1\u00a2 -and.<\/p>\n
– the need to detveiop   that no further constzuctions ‘ 1
\n. ‘shall’- be made     the limits of ‘ the park T<\/p>\n
speci\ufb01eddin   1998 Without obtaining the clearance _ T<\/p>\n
‘ I 1:;   dixeetione issued .133} this Ciourt, the State.-‘
\ndde\u00e9vemment has  2005 seeI<ing';ieImis$io11 of the Court ' to<\/p>\n
'   two I Reeep\ufb01on Counters outside the limits of the park as<\/p>\n
d  Reception Counters near. Axnbedltar Statue andDevaraj<\/p>\n
 H  V  U13" Statue?  the limits of the park bo1_1ndar.ies.- These Reception _<\/p>\n
 1 according to' the State Government, are 'necessary for the<\/p>\n
 of Vidhana Soudha and Vikasa Soudha azeas. It is stated that<\/p>\n
an<\/p>\n
the area whom Vidhana Soudha and Vikasa 'Soudha' '  located ie a<\/p>\n
1:\n<\/p>\n
‘high securit\ufb01r \ufb01sharea which __neet1s special j;)’rotectio1_1va?.r’1:.\u00a2:i’;sec’11r:it;3r and
\nthat in recent tjm_es,  and militant  10:11 the
\ntncreetse and therefore the StafC_ ‘ Geverhm\u00e9\ufb02i,
\n  Iestric\ufb01ons
\n_deeided_ to adcq\ufb01ately aproteet it  f  aaraa.-3’ _\n<\/p>\n
– sml\ufb01untt\ufb01lg Vidhana’ so1_1dha    has been
\n‘made to  .penriis’siorL:’to_:  F’eeeptioh”Cot1nters. . , ‘ ‘ ‘
\n‘ .Wheh- the – _    hearing  befoIe; us. ext ‘
\n.2ts.–10-2005, the.V1e\u00e9H=n\u00a7ed  \ufb01led a memo stating that
\nhthne jmatter  _.for Raj ]3havan’  “High T
\n of the  Gpverrlrhent.\n<\/p>\n
and   _cha1r.b:er_ of the _c_:};.ie’r  on. _. T
\nOctober    decindeds in  j to s\ufb01en\ufb01men the T’<\/p>\n
    adequately in regard to ‘High   Raj ‘I<\/p>\n
 Bhavan _Vas_wei1,_ It may be meh\ufb01oned that the High Court  also.
\nAtiogatgatt  adjoining Vidha\ufb01a Soudhal and viggasa _S_oudha-amill<\/p>\n
 M V _ ther\u00e9fore..__it: was necessary “to make provisions for its Tseeuuritjr. It was .<\/p>\n
h 5’ ”  Jpoitltedh  to the Court that–the Commissioner of Poliee would stiggest ‘
\nh  T;  measures for the bilildihgs incI’udi1’1gthe High Court after .A<\/p>\n
   .Qor1suh:;ing the Registrar General. a we then directed the Police
\n \ufb01lommissioner to gilace beftjire the  a co prehensive pmposal :i11
\n1;\u00bb 11~.o,..s_.;e.u:\u00bb.:t;. aw>a\u00bb~g.<u\u00ab'n–\u00ab't.:. 'ls '\/Le  4% 76h… ;z..cf:.w. A5"i9.pg
\nregard  befp1e_ permission could be granted to the State<\/p>\n
I Government to rnake adequate security anarlgements in terms of the ..<\/p>\n
J prayer made in the application. IJ'
\n . 'A.V_,\u00a2%\u00a7.\\k"'<\/p>\n
' 3
\n__ In pursuance to the arm-said dixec\ufb01\u00e9n isSue{1'b3f _V 1_;he_
\nPlincipal S\u00e9clttaiy, Hollie, conveiried,a_J11c:=;ti1_1g of  Vdi\ufb02bnmnt
\nT' .Dc\ufb01ar't1nc;1ts inclundilrlg ihg Additional %o:%Lp\u00a7;;\u00a2.; T<\/p>\n
I _ some decisions -therein.  copy of 't13g\u00e9 <\/p>\n
'M…S.  a'11w2rV’c’:x’%e:Vr:,.vvv__;;;A.e:1:’i\u00ab:e it cllcarnn that tile State’.(.}ov\u00a2=Lmn.1_ent will pot<\/p>\n
 \ufb02irther const1’ucti_6n cjth\u00e9r than what is a\ufb01soiumly
\n_  of Rccc\ufb01tion Cou\ufb01terg  for up?”\n<\/p>\n
  V’ ; the f\u00e9nce  the High Cbuit bu\ufb02dj\ufb01g aiong wiih the pmposedgatcs’.<\/p>\n
\n\nChief} Kusstice\n\n   %%   _    A Sd\/'\n\"   Shh\/~  I ' Judge\n\nbeen 'placed on the _'Iec',;oI'id\" alongliwifh 4t'_.'ac '1.'\u00ab,1'you1.;    of the _\n\n<\/pre>\n
HaVi_11’g.-p\u00e9r’us_ed’ the.  as the layout’ plan  the _ “T I<\/p>\n
  by     the St’:-ate  ythe-T “T<\/p>\n
2 Rec\u00e9p\ufb01on—–eeu\u00a7it\u00a2}s’ a1\u00a7o._Vsi\u00a3uu1:g=qieous1y _iinp1emc1;t the layout plan % %<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009 Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & Shantanagoudar IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF ‘AUGUST. 2001 PRESENT THEHON’BLE MR. P.V. REDDI, CHIEF JUSTICE 3 \u00ab A AND ‘THE HoN’BLE MR. JUSTICE-N:K;*PATTL Vf […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-159942","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & ... on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & ... on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-20T06:31:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"27 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-20T06:31:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":4350,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & ... on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-20T06:31:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & ... on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & ... on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-20T06:31:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"27 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-20T06:31:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009"},"wordCount":4350,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009","name":"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & ... on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-20T06:31:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bimal-n-desai-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-chief-secy-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bimal N Desai vs State Of Karnataka By Chief Secy & … on 12 October, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159942","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=159942"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159942\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159942"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159942"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159942"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}