Dismissed

Y.Gangappa S/O Late Yelubenchi Kotrappa v. the Deputy Commissioner

Karnataka HC20 Feb 2019WP/108682/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, dismissed a writ petition challenging an order by the Deputy Commissioner allowing an appeal under the Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. The Court held that the impugned order does not warrant interference.

What did the court decide?

Petition stands disposed off by affirming the order impugned.

Y.Gangappa S/O Late Yelubenchi Kotrappa Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

: 1 :

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G. NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.108682 OF 2018 (SC-ST)

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

Y. GANGAPPA S/O LATE YELUBENCHI KOTRAPPA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KONDANAYAKANA HALLI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BALLARI.

¶8

BHEEMAPPA S/O LATE YELUBENCHI KOTRAPPA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KONDANAYAKANA HALLI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BALLARI.

¶9

SHIVARAMAPPA S/O LATE YELUBENCHI KOTRAPPA, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KONDANAYAKANA HALLI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BALLARI.

¶10

HANUMANTAPP S/O LATE YELUBENCHI KOTRAPPA, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KONDANAYAKANA HALLI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BALLARI.

¶11

VENKATESHAPPA S/O LATE YELUBENCHI KOTRAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY L.R.

¶12

: 2 :

¶13

5A. SMT. TAYAMMA W/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA KOTRAPP, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: KONDANAYAKANA HALLI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BALLARI. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V. M. SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BALLARI. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HOSPET. 3. L. HEMAGIRIYAPPA S/O LAKSHMAPPA, AGE: 34 YEARS, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 4. L. BARAMARAJ S/O LAKSHMAPPA AGE: 30 YEARS, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 5. SMT. SAVITRAMMA W/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 6. L. JAYALXI D/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET.

¶14

: 3 :

¶15

L. DEVRAJ S/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 8. C. PRATHAP S/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 9. SRI. GOPALA S/O L. LAKHMAPPA AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 10. SMT. PARWATATHAMMA W/O LATE NAGABHUSHANA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HALE MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE, TQ: HOSPET. 11. KALAPPA ACHARI S/O LATE YELUBENCHI KOTRAPPA AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: RANI THOTA, BALLARI, TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BALLARI. ... RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. ANTHONY R RODRIGUES, AGA FOR R1 AND R2)

¶17

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED IN PTCL/APL NO. 88/2013-14 DATED 29.08.2018 PASSED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT, PRODUCED AND MARKED AT ANNEXURE-"F".

¶18

: 4 :

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING , THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶22

Petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the 1^st respondent/ Deputy Commissioner and Appellate Authority under the Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, whereby the Appellate Authority was pleased to allow the appeal registered as PTCL No.88/2013-14 and was pleased to direct the Assistant Commissioner, Hospet to conduct a de novo inquiry and dispose off the same after rendering a finding with regard to the caste of the grantee at the time of grant.

¶23

The Deputy Commissioner has set out

¶24

detailed reasons in support of his conclusion. The reasons set out are cogent and sustainable. The order passed in no way prejudices the rights of the petitioner.

¶25

: 5 :

¶26

It is not in doubt that the caste of the grantee, is the pillar on which the entire case rests and until and unless the said fact is established, the question of invoking provisions of the Act would not arise.

¶27

In that view of the matter, the order impugned does not warrant any interference. Accordingly, petition stands disposed off by affirming the order impugned.

¶28

Sd/JUDGE

¶29

yan

Y.Gangappa S/O Late Yelubenchi Kotrappa v. the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Y.Gangappa S/O Late Yelubenchi Kotrappa v. the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Miran Mohiddin Peerzada Vs the Police Inspector

Renuka S/O Hanumanthappa Katagi Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Smt. Chitrangi G. Naik Vs the State of Karantaka

Primary Agriculture Credit Vs State of Karnataka

Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society Ltd., Vs Ballari District Sahakar AGRICULTU8RE Poroducing

Adarsha Multipurpose Vs the State of Karnataka