Shivagangamma M.C. and Others vs State of Karnataka and Pathanjali Yoga Shikshana Trust

J.S. Khehar, C.J.—Respondent No. 3 is stated to have executed a sale deed dated 13.10.2000, transferring land measuring 23''x40''. The claim of the Petitioners herein was, that the land in question had been earmarked for the purpose of a park, and such, could not have been sold by Respondent No. 3 to Respondent No. 4.

During the course of hearing, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 4 handed over to us five photographs, which are collectively taken on record and marked as Annexure-X. Based on Annexure-X, it is the vehement contention of the learned Counsel representing Respondent No. 4, that the land in question is being used exclusively as a park-cum-playground for children, and as such, no violation can be deemed to have been committed in the matter of transfer of the land in question, at the hands of Respondent No. 3 to Respondent. No. 4. Additionally, Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 contend, that the aforesaid land shall continue to be used as park-cum-playground hereinafter, without any deviation whatsoever.

A perusal of the photographs collectively handed over to us at Annexure-X reveal the construction of a small building. The aforesaid construction we are informed is subject matter of challenge before this Court, through Writ Petition No. 36559/2010.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioners very fairly states, that he has no objection to the use of the land under reference for the purpose of a park-cum-playground, as has been suggested by the Respondents. He, however, seriously disputes the construction made thereon, as has been depicted in the foregoing paragraphs.

In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are satisfied, that the instant writ petition deserves to be allowed, in terms of the statement made by learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to the effect, that the Respondents shall continue to utilize the land in question for playground-cum-park hereinafter, without any deviation whatsoever. Insofar as the small constructed area is concerned, we refrain from adjudicating upon the aforesaid issue. A decision thereon shall be in terms of the order, which will be passed in Writ Petition No. 36559/2010. In order to allow the Petitioners the right to participate in the aforesaid proceedings, we grant them liberty to move an appropriate application for imp leading in the aforesaid writ petition.

Allowed in the aforesaid terms.