MARY JUJE D SOUZA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three petitions are by the same person, who in substance seeks a direction for the regularization of the alleged unauthorized occupation of the land in question, after setting aside certain endorsement that arguably comes in the way of her retaining the said land.

(2.) THE GIST OF THREE WRIT PETITIONS IS AS UNDER:

(3.) The official Respondents are represented by the learned AGA. The private Respondent-contractor having got himself impleaded in W.P.No.9739/2022, is represented by his private counsel. Both they resist the Writ Petition contending that the land being situate within the specified radius, does not admit regularization of unauthorized occupation, as the law now stands; Petitioner is in the unauthorized occupation of only about 34 guntas of the land in question; her claim in respect of larger extent is factually untrue & legally untenable; even otherwise, the earmarking of land for the Joga Management Authority is in public interest and therefore, Petitioner's private interest, if any, has to yield to the same. The entries in the Revenue Records apart from being unauthorized, do not support Petitioner's claim and that they do not enjoy presumptive validity. Regularization of unauthorized occupancy of the Government land cannot be sought for as a matter of right, the promulgation of Rules in that regard, notwithstanding. So contending, they seek dismissal of the Writ Petitions.