M/S HMT Limited vs State Of Karnataka & Ors

Suraj Govindaraj, J

The Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;

i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directing the respondents to delete the petitioner land listed at SL.No.49 annexed to Publication dated 06.10.2025 and restrain the Respondents, their officers, agents or any person acting on their behalf from in any manner entering upon, interfering with, or granting permission to use the petitioner’s land for any commercial or public purpose, including the establishment of temporary stalls or structures.

ii. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice and equity.

Learned counsel for Respondent No.3 submits that the sports facility/playground of the Petitioner is not in the list of the identified playgrounds where firecracker stalls are permitted to be installed. Her submission is taken on record.

Learned counsel for Respondent No.3, however, submits that in the year of 2012 one other playground coming within the property of the Petitioner had been used for the purpose of setting up of firecracker stalls. If that be so, the said land could continue to be used for the very same purpose now also.

The manner in which the above litigation has proceeded with requires this Court to issue certain general directions inasmuch as the playground of the Petitioner had been identified by Respondent No.3 without any notice having been issued to the Petitioner and it is only when the stall owners sought to put up their stalls in the playground of the Petitioner that the Petitioner was forced to approach this Court.

In that view of the matter, the Chief Commissioner, henceforth is directed to take up the matter of identification of the lands in a proactive manner at an earlier stage whenever any lands or playgrounds are identified, to issue notices to the persons who are maintaining or running the sports facilities or the playgrounds, to provide them an opportunity of hearing and then identify the said playgrounds before forwarding it to the Government for issuance of necessary notification. Since the playground of the Petitioner has been deleted from the list identified by Respondent No.3, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed and the petition stands closed. Since another playground of the Petitioner had bee used earlier, the same can be used even this year. Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

i) Writ petition is partly-allowed.

ii) Respondent No.2 is directed to issue a Corrigendum deleting the subject land from the notification issued and including the adjoining playground, which had earlier been used for setting up firecracker stalls.