ORDER : B.S. Patil, J. In these writ petitions, petitioners are calling in question order dated 30-7-2015 passed by 1st respondent-Upa-lokayukta and the consequential survey report and sketch produced at Annexures-AF and AG submitted by the Assistant Director of Land Records, City Survey No. 1, K.R. Circle, Bangalore-respondent 3 herein. Entire proceedings pending before the Karnataka Lokayukta-1st respondent in Compt/UPlok-2/Misc-l282/2015 are also assailed. 2. Facts leading to the writ petitions, briefly stated are; a representation was submitted on 13-5-2015 by the Divisional Manager, Railway (Works), South Western Railway, Bangalore Division, Bangalore, requesting for a direction to the revenue and BLIMP officials to conduct re-survey of the lands belonging to various persons including petitioners herein by taking note of the land records of the Railways. Grievance made by the Railways was that they were the owners of land situated abutting M/s. Mantri Developers-petitioner herein and that petitioners were trying to encroach upon the railway land and that they could successfully prevent such encroachment at one point of time by removing fencing erected by the Developers somewhere in the year 2011. The Railways further referred to the writ petition in W.P. Nos. 34651 to 34653 of 2011 filed against Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited; despite the order passed in the said writ petition, M/s. Mantri Developers were trying to encroach upon the railway land in the guise of constructing a road for public by utilising the complete land available for them for the purpose of developing the same into a housing and commercial complex. They further alleged that Railways had approached the Revenue Department for conducting survey of the property belonging to the Railways and M/s. Mantri Developers as per the direction of the Assistant Director of Land Records but the authorities failed to take any action to carry out survey and measurement. Hence, it was urged by them that appropriate direction be given by the Upa-lokayukta to the revenue and BEMP officials to resurvey the area for demarcating the land belonging to various persons and authorities. Based on this representation, the Upa-lokayukta initiated proceedings. 3. Hence, it was urged by them that appropriate direction be given by the Upa-lokayukta to the revenue and BEMP officials to resurvey the area for demarcating the land belonging to various persons and authorities. Based on this representation, the Upa-lokayukta initiated proceedings. 3. As can be seen from Annexure-Z proceeding, Upa-lokayukta passed an order on 18-5-2015 referring to the complaint submitted by the Railways and the allegations made therein that M/s. Mantri Developers appeared to have acquired certain land from private party to construct Mantri Mall and residential quarters and that they had encroached upon railway land for which Railways had taken objections. It has been further narrated in the said order that there was a dispute as to the identity of properties owned by the Railways as well as M/s. Mantri Developers. A reference is also made to the fact that some records revealed that there was BBMP property and a lake and therefore, it was necessary to protect public property be it the property of the State Government or the local body or the Central Government or the Railways. Hence, in order to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint and to fix the date for joint survey, the Upa-lokayukta persuaded himself to hold that the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, Deputy Director of Land Records, Bangalore Urban District and the Additional Commissioner, BBMP had to be directed to submit their response to the allegations made in the complaint in person on 21-5-2015 at 11.30 a.m. 4. Proceeding sheet produced at Annexure-AA discloses that the enquiry was attended by various officers as directed and the Deputy Director of Land Records submitted that the land fell within the city survey and hence, it was the Assistant Director of Land Records who had to conduct the survey. Therefore, noticing that there was dispute in respect of Government land, Railway land and petitioners' land, a direction was issued to carry out survey by taking into consideration the original title deeds, survey and village map so as to identify boundaries and the extent of properties of respective parties including petitioners herein. Pursuant to this direction, authorities of the Survey Department have conducted survey and have filed a report dated 30-7-2015 as per Annexure-AF along with a sketch showing the properties of petitioners and the Railways. 5. Pursuant to this direction, authorities of the Survey Department have conducted survey and have filed a report dated 30-7-2015 as per Annexure-AF along with a sketch showing the properties of petitioners and the Railways. 5. Perusal of the said report (Annexure-AF) and the sketch discloses that petitioners are alleged to have encroached upon different extent of land comprised in Sy. No. 17 of Jakkasandra and Sy Nos. 42/2 and 56 of Hanumanthapura. Several other observations are made in the said report alleging encroachment by petitioners herein. Thereafter, on 30-7-2015 the Upa-lokayukta has passed the impugned order at Annexure AH noticing the survey and measurement carried out by the authorities and taking the same on record and further making certain observations and issuing certain directions. It is necessary to refer to the said observations contained in paragraph Nos. 7, 8 and 9 of the order dated 30-7-2015. They read as under: "7. As far as the encroachment of railway land is concerned, it is stated to be vacant and submitted that the boundary marks have to be re-fixed and the same would be done by following the procedure prescribed. 8. As far as the lake area is concerned, the metro lane is drawn on the same and the Revenue Department is required to take steps for protection of revenue land. 9. Since the joint survey and the note submitted by the ADLR, City Survey reveals encroachment of land by M/s. Hamara Shelter, the Revenue Authorities namely, the Tahsildar, Bangalore North is directed to take steps in pursuance of the joint survey report and fix the boundaries of the railway land as well as M/s. Hamara Shelter and the revenue land and action taken report on tire same is submitted forthwith not later than 10th September, 2015." 6. It is contended by learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioners that Upa-lokayukta has exceeded his power in directing to conduct survey of the land belonging to petitioner. It is also urged that orders dated 18-5-2015 and 21-5-2015 culminating in survey and measurement and the consequential final order dated 30-7-2015 were all without authority of law. It is his submission that petitioners being private parties had every right to protect their rights over the property by approaching the Civil Court and it was open for the Railways to approach the Competent Court to seek remedy in respect of their property. It is his submission that petitioners being private parties had every right to protect their rights over the property by approaching the Civil Court and it was open for the Railways to approach the Competent Court to seek remedy in respect of their property. However, having not chosen to air their grievance before the Competent Court of law, the Railways had approached the Upa-lokayukta to have an enquiry conducted behind the back of petitioners to ascertain the alleged encroachment and thereby to virtually throw the petitioners out of the portion of the property in their possession and enjoyment. 7. Countering the above contentions, learned Counsel appearing for the Railways and the learned Counsel appearing for the Lokayukta as also learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submit that what all the Upa-lokayukta has done is to direct the authorities to consider the representation submitted by the Railways and to take action in accordance with law by carrying out survey of the lands belonging to various persons and therefore, no fault could be found in the exercise of power by Upa-lokayukta in that regard. It is also contended by learned Counsel for respondents that before conducting survey, Revenue Authorities, particularly, Assistant Director of Land Records has issued notice to petitioners and therefore, they cannot have any grievance with regard to the survey conducted. They also urge that if at all petitioners were aggrieved by the survey conducted, they ought to have challenged the survey by filing necessary application. 8. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for all parties and on careful perusal of the entire materials on record, we find that in Annexure-AZ proceeding dated 18-5-2015, the Upa-lokayukta after noticing that there was dispute regarding the identity of properties of the Railways as well as M/s. Mantri Developers and that there were certain records which disclosed that property of the BBMP and also a lake called Jakkarayanakere were located in the disputed area, has persuaded himself to direct the Director of Land Records and the Revenue Authorities to take action to survey and measure the lands in question. The Upa-lokayukta did not stop there, he has gone on to direct the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, Deputy Director of Land Records, Bangalore Urban District and the Additional Commissioner, BBMP to submit their response to the allegations made in the complaint in person on 21-5-2015 at 11.30 a.m. 9. The Upa-lokayukta did not stop there, he has gone on to direct the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, Deputy Director of Land Records, Bangalore Urban District and the Additional Commissioner, BBMP to submit their response to the allegations made in the complaint in person on 21-5-2015 at 11.30 a.m. 9. Petitioners, against whom the allegations had been made were neither notified nor provided any opportunity to have their say Apparently because petitioners being private parties, the Upa-lokayukta could not have issued any direction to them. If at all the Revenue Authorities had not considered the representation of the Railways for conducting survey and carrying out measurement of the lands belonging to Railways and the adjoining lands belonging to Mantri Developers or for that matter any other authorities or persons, then, the Upa-lokayukta ought to have issued necessary direction to carry out measurement of the property in accordance with law and should have left the parties to avail the remedies open to them before the appropriate forum including the Civil Court. Instead, the Upa-lokayukta has, having noticed the claims and counter claims made by the parties including petitioners herein continued the proceedings. As a result, the Assistant Director of Land Records having conducted survey and measurement filed his report vide Annexure-AF along with a sketch disclosing that certain extent of lands in different survey numbers were encroached by petitioners. The Upa-lokayukta has finally passed the impugned order dated 30-7-2015 holding that as the joint survey conducted revealed encroachment by petitioners, the Revenue Authorities namely, the Tahsildar, Bangalore North shall take steps pursuant to the joint survey report and fix boundaries of the land of Railways as well as petitioners' land and also the revenue land. Action taken report was also directed to be submitted forthwith before 10-9-2015. As a result of the said order, the Tahsildar issued notice dated 1-9-2015 fixing the date for demarcation of the boundaries. 10. It is, therefore, clear that due to the order passed by the Upa-lokayukta and the proceedings initiated before him and the consequent survey and measurement conducted by the Assistant Director of Land Records, petitioners have been deprived of their rights to agitate their grievance before the competent forum. 10. It is, therefore, clear that due to the order passed by the Upa-lokayukta and the proceedings initiated before him and the consequent survey and measurement conducted by the Assistant Director of Land Records, petitioners have been deprived of their rights to agitate their grievance before the competent forum. At the first instance, they were deprived of convincing the Upa-lokayukta of their rights over the property owned and possessed by them and as to how they had not encroached upon any portion and so also how the claim made by the Railways could not have been entertained. Thus, the entire action initiated against petitioners by the Upa-lokayukta although stemmed out of the representation of the Railways has virtually affected the right, title and interest of the petitioners over the immovable property owned and possessed by them. 11. Impugned proceedings have now resulted in recording a finding against petitioners that they have encroached upon the land belonging to Railways and that the Revenue Authorities had to fix the had bast so that the encroachment made by petitioners was removed. Such an action, in our view, could not have been taken in the proceedings initiated before the Upa-lokayukta. The Upa-lokayukta could not have issued such a direction which affected the interest of a private individual who has been deprived of an opportunity to protect his rights by approaching the appropriate forum including the Courts of law. Therefore, in our view, impugned order passed by the Upa-lokayukta deserves to be set aside. 12. Accordingly, impugned order and the consequential action taken by the Assistant Director of Land Records in conducting survey and measurement of the property are set aside. However, as the Railways have submitted a representation requesting the authorities, particularly the Revenue Department to conduct survey of the lands of Railways and the petitioners to find out the encroachment, if any, ends of justice require that the Assistant Director of Land Records shall carry out survey and measurement of the lands belonging to the Railways and the petitioners in accordance with law by issuing necessary notice to all interested persons including the BBMP or the State Government, if they have any interest in the same. In such case, it would be open to both parties to work out their remedy before the appropriate authorities/forum. In such case, it would be open to both parties to work out their remedy before the appropriate authorities/forum. Survey and measurement shall be conducted within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.