NAVA JEEVAN NILAYA vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022








IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

WRIT PETITION NO.8214 OF 2022 (KLR-LG)

BETWEEN:

1.
NAVA JEEVAN NILAYA
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
SRI. P.S. BAGILTHAYA
AIRPORT WHITEFIELD ROAD
MARATHALLI
BENGALURU -560037.
…PETITIONER







(BY SRI. A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
M S BUILDING
BENGALURU -560001.

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE CITY DISTRICT
BENGALURU-560001.

3. THE TAHSILDAR
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BENGALURU -560092.



Digitally signed
by CHAYA S A
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



4. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER
KARNATAKA EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
BENGALURU-560036.

5. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
ANANDA RAO CIRCLE
LAKSHMINPURI
GANDHI NAGAR
BENGALURU -560008
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.


…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 14.01.2022 BEARING
NO.LND(V) CR 114/2000-21; LND/CR/285/2004-05 AND
LND/CR 684/2011-12 AND THE LETTER DATED 07.03.2022
BEARING NO. LND(V) CR 114/2000-21 LND/CR/285/2004-05
AND LND/CR 684/2011-12 VIDE ANNEXURE-A REJECTING THE
REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER FOR RENEWAL OF LEASE OF
THE LAND IN SY.NO.36 IN MUNNEKOLALU VILLAGE, VARTHUR
HOBLI, BENGALURU BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AUTHORITY AS

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



THE SAME IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND BAD IN THE EYES OF
LAW; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR
ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY,
E.S. INDIRESH J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

CAV ORDER

1. In this Writ Petition, petitioner is assailing the
endorsement bearing Nos. LND(V)CR/114/2000-21;
LND/CR/285/2004-05; LND/CR/684/2011-12 dated 14.01.2022
(Annexure-A), communication made in letter dated 07.03.2022
(Annexrue-A1), both issued by respondent No.3; inter alia
sought for a direction to the respondents to consider the order
dated 20.12.2021 passed in WP No.23475/2021 (Annexure-
AAA) to renew the lease of the subject land bearing Sy.No.36
situated in Munnekolalu Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru
EastTaluk.
2. The relevant facts for adjudication of this Writ Petition are
that the petitioner - Society is running educational institutions

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



as per its bye-laws produced at Annexure-B in the name and
style of "Nava Jeevana Nilaya" with the object of aid for
reviving leprosy patients since 1950. It is further stated that,
pursuant to the application made by the petitioner - Society,
the State Government vide proceedings dated 12.10.1959
(Annexure-C), granted 9 acres 18 guntas of land in land
bearing Sy.No.36 of Munnekolalu Village, Varthur Hobli,
Bengaluru East Taluk, under lease for a period of 30 years to
locate a training centre for lepers (leprocy affected persons).
Thereafter, in addition to above lease of land, the Government
has sanctioned the adjacent land bearing Sy.No.41 measuring
10 acres 17 guntas as per Annexure-D. In that view of the
matter, petitioner is in possession of total extent of 20 acres 17
guntas of land in Sy.Nos.36 and 41 of Munnekolalu Village. It is
further stated that, the petitioner - Society has started
Rehabilitation Center in the subject land with an objective to
provide care and medical assistance to the leprosy patients who
were admitted to the Centre. It is further stated that, the
petitioner - Society has started 'Bala Vihara School' as per the
sanction accorded by the Government as per Annexure-F and

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



F1 respectively. In the interregnum period, the lease tenure
was extended for a further period of 30 years vide order dated
05.07.1991 (Annexure-H) by the respondent-Government. It is
further stated that, the respondent - Government has granted
lease of 5 acres in Sy.No.41 for the construction of Cancer
Hospital by Hospice Trust in the name 'Karunashraya', as per
order dated 27.06.1995. It is also stated that, 4 acres of land in
Sy.No.41 was leased in favour of Kanchi Kamakoti Medical
Trust to establish an eye hospital as per order dated
04.11.2004 and finally, land left out in favour of the petitioner -
Society is to an extent of 1 acre 33 guntas out of 20 acres 17
guntas, originally granted in favour of the petitioner - Society.
It is further stated that, the respondent - Government has
granted permission to the petitioner - Society to start
Kindergarten classes for the Academic Year 2006-07, as per the
order dated 25.04.2006 and accordingly, the petitioner -
Society has started 'Nava Pragnya Poorva Prathamika School'.
It is further stated in the Writ Petition that the respondent -
Government has caused notice dated 28.03.2014 (Annexure-JJ)
to cancel lease made in favour of the petitioner - Society and

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



thereafter, the petitioner - Society addressed reply dated
16.06.2014(Annexure-KK) and thereby the respondent-
authority has passed an order dated 30.03.2015 (Annexure-LL)
and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner - Society has
challenged the same in W.P.No.19862/2015 and this Court,
vide order dated 07.09.2015(Annexure-MM), permitted the
petitioner - Society to withdraw the Writ Petition to approach
the Government for addressing their grievance again. In the
meanwhile, the petitioner - Society has addressed several
representations to the respondent–Government to continue the
existing Institutions. It is also stated that, the petitioner -
Society has approached this Court in W.P.No.23475/2021
challenging the order dated 14.06.2021 passed by respondent
No.2, handing over the land bearing Sy.No.36 to the
respondent No.5, and this Court granted interim order not to
dispossess the petitioner - Society from the land to an extent of
1 acre 33 guntas. It is also stated in the Writ Petition that the
petitioner - Society is running the Institution with over and
above 1020 students and same was brought to the notice of
the respondent - Government as to the cause of rehabilitation

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



of leprosy patients and despite the same, the respondent-
authorities have passed the endorsement dated 14.01.2022
(Annexure-A) and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner -
Society has presented this Writ Petition.
3. Heard Sri. A. Mahesh Chowdhary, Learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Shamanth Naik, learned
Additional Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents.
4. It is contended by Sri. A. Mahesh Chowdhary, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner - Society that the
respondent-authorities have interfered with the cancellation of
lease period on the following four grounds:
(a) Default Clause in the lease period as the said period is
completed by efflux of time as well as non payment of
lease rent;
(b) Unauthorised construction has been made by the
petitioner - Society;
(c) Charging exorbitant fee and

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



(d) Not utilising the entire extent of 1 acre 33 guntas of
land leased to the petitioner-Society.
5. Sri. A. Mahesh Chowdhary, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner submitted that the petitioner - Society has
tendered lease rent through Demand Drafts and same was
refused by the Government and therefore, sought to justify the
payment of rent is concerned as per copies of the Demand
Drafts produced in the Writ Petition. It is also argued by the
learned counsel that the respondent-authorities have granted
permission for construction of School and allowed to admit the
students through RTE and further, issued certificate of land
dated 10.06.2011 (Annexure-X) and therefore, contended that
the allegation made against the petitioner - Society as to the
non-utilisation of entire extent of land and running School
without permission or facilities is incorrect. It is further
contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner - Society
that construction has been made by the petitioner - Society to
run the school based on the permission granted by the
respondent-authorities and BDA and therefore, it is contended
by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



grounds urged by the respondent-authorities to cancel the
lease granted in favour of the petitioner - Society as per the
impugned endorsement at Annexure-A is incorrect. Learned
counsel further contended that, the respondent-Government
has appointed a Tahsildar as Administrator of the School and
the entire affairs of the petitioner - Society has been conducted
through the permission of the Tahsildar and therefore, sought
for interference of this Court. In this regard, it is argued that
the respondent-authorities are estopped from cancelling the
grant on the grounds referred to above and therefore,
contended that, as there is more than 950 students along with
the Teaching and non-Teaching staff and rehabilitation of
resident leprosy cured inmates and therefore contended that
the lease period is required to be continued by taking into
consideration the object of the petitioner - Society.
6. In order to buttress his arguments, learned counsel for
the petitioner - Society referred to the Judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of GODREJ SARA LEE LIMITED Vs.
EXCISE AND TAXATION OFFICER-CUM-ASSESSING AUTHORITY
AND OTHERS reported in (2025) 11 SCC 808 and contended

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



that, though the petitioner - Society is having alternative
remedy, however, the inaction and arbitrariness on the part of
the respondent-authorities and further the respondent-
authorities lack fair play action and therefore, sought for
interference of this Court. Further, learned counsel for the
petitioner places reliance on the Judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of KOLKATA MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION AND ANOTHER Vs. BIMAL KUMAR SHAH AND
OTHERS reported in (2024) 10 SCC 533 and argued that the
impugned endorsement has been issued without providing
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner - Society, and
therefore, sought for interference of this Court.
7. Per contra, Sri. Shamanth Naik, learned Additional
Government Advocate, sought to support the impugned
endorsement and contended that the petitioner - Society is
having an alternative remedy to approach the competent
authority and further, it is argued that, as the period specified
in the lease has come to an end and therefore, by efflux of
time, the petitioner - Society is required to vacate the schedule
land and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the Writ Petition.

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



Finally it is contended by learned Additional Government
Advocate, that the permission granted by the respondent-
authorities to run the School is by the Department of Education
and same has not been approved by the Revenue Department
and therefore, sought for dismissal of the Writ Petition.
8. In this regard, learned Additional Government Advocate
places reliance on the Judgment of this Court in the case of
SRI S. SUNDARESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS,
reported in ILR 2016 KAR 4019 and accordingly sought for
dismissal of the Writ Petition.
9. In the light of the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the
land to an extent of 9 acres 18 guntas of land bearing Sy.No.36
of Munnekolalu Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk,
was under lease for a period of 30 years to locate a training
centre for lepers (leprocy affected persons). Further, the
Government has sanctioned the adjacent land bearing Sy.No.41
measuring 10 acres 17 guntas as per Annexure-D. In that view
of the matter, petitioner was in possession of total extent of 20

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



acres 17 guntas of land in Sy.Nos.36 and 41 of Munnekolalu
Village. Thereafter, the Government has allotted major portion
of the land to various Organizations for construction of eye
hospital, Cancer Hospice Hospital, construction of hospital by
Sri Krishna Sevashrama Trust and ultimately, out of 20 acres
17 guntas, presently the land remaining with the petitioner -
Society is to an extent of 1 acre 33 guntas. In the said land,
the petitioner - Society has constructed the Rehabilitation
Centre for Lepers. The object of the Society is intended for a
noble cause to locate a Training centre for Lepers. It is also
forthcoming from the Writ Petition that, time and again, the
petitioner - Society has requested the respondent -
Government for according permission for conducting CBSE and
State Syllabus education and same has been granted by the
State Government. It is not in dispute that the petitioner -
Society is discharging its objectives since 1959 as per
Annexure-C where the first allotment of 9 acres and 18 guntas
of land in Sy.No.36 of Munnekolalu Village was granted for a
lease period of 30 years and thereafter, the same was extended
for a further period of 30 years as per order dated 05.07.1991.

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



It is also forthcoming during the arguments that the
respondent-authorities have interfered with the affairs of the
petitioner - Society at the instance of the complaint lodged by
one Karnataka Prajarajya Vedike. Taking into consideration the
Demand Drafts made in favour of the respondent-authorities as
to payment of rent is concerned and further the respondent -
Government has accorded permission for establishing new
Schools including Kindergarten and therefore the contentions
raised by learned Additional Government Advocate cannot be
accepted. It is also evident from the impugned endorsement
that interference was made as to violation of the lease
conditions, however, there is no specific allegation de-hors the
permission granted by the respondent-authorities to run the
School in the subject land and therefore, I am of the view that
the reasons assigned in the impugned endorsement to cancel
the lease tenure is incorrect and liable to be quashed.
10. Though the learned Additional Government Advocate
contended that the petitioner - Society is having an efficacious
remedy and the lease had expired by efflux of time, however,
taking into consideration the noble cause of the petitioner -

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



Society to admit leprosy children, RTE students recommended
by the respondent - Government and also the residence has
been provided for inmate leprosy affected persons and that
apart, the petitioner - Society is running its affairs in the land in
question since 1959, I am of the view that cancellation of the
lease period at the instance of some third parties who are in no
way connected with the object of the petitioner - Society is
incorrect and therefore, the Judgment referred to by the
learned Additional Government Advocate cannot be made
applicable to the facts of the case by looking into the object of
the petitioner – Society to safeguard the interest of lepers.
11. Be that as it may, though an extent of 20 acres 17 guntas
was allotted on lease to the petitioner - Society, however, the
land remained with the petitioner - Society is only to an extent
of 1 acre 33 guntas, wherein the petitioner - Society has
established the fully constructed building to aid the weaker
section of the society and with the object to eradicate
leprosy/spreading of leprosy and therefore, I am of the view
that the reason assigned in the impugned endorsement is
incorrect.

- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



12. Though learned Additional Government Advocate
submitted that the petitioner - Society has to exhaust the
alternate remedy, however, considering the Judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of STATE OF U.P. Vs.
MOHAMMAD NOOH reported in AIR 1958 SC 86 and in the case
of WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION Vs. REGISTRAR OF TRADE
MARKS, MUMBAI AND OTHERS, reported in (1998) 8 SCC 1,
I am of the view that, the petitioner - Society cannot be
relegated to approach the competent authority in the peculiar
circumstances of the case and the ends of justice has to be met
by following the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of VARALA BHARATH KUMAR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF
TELANGANA AND ANOTHER reported in (2017) 9 SCC 413.
13. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

(ii) The endorsement bearing No.LND(V)CR/114/2000-
21; LND/CR/285/2004-05; LND/CR/684/2011-12,
dated 14.01.2022(Annexure-A) and communication

- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61913
WP No. 8214 of 2022


CNR: KAHC010171822022



made vide letter dated 07.03.2022 (Annexrue-A1),
issued by respondent No.3 are hereby set aside.

(iii) The competent respondent-authorities are directed
to renew the lease period for a further period of
fifteen years in respect of land to an extent of
1 acre 33 guntas in Sy.No.36 situated in
Munnekolalu Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East
Taluk, in terms of the observation made above.

(iv) The respondent-authority is directed to receive the
arrears of rent due if any, and petitioner-Society is
directed to pay the same, within one month from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE


sac
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70