Disposed

Smt Sarojamma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Oct 2019WP/2242/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking to set aside orders forfeiting land granted to the petitioner. Noticing that the dispute had been shifted to a separate proceeding (L & DSR 92/08-09) regarding unintentional land sale by the petitioner, the Court held the current appeal infiructuous and disposed of the writ without adjudicating the merits.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of by holding the appeal infructuous due to the pendency of a separate proceeding on the same facts.

Smt Sarojamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

¶6

W.P.NO.2242/2012 (KLR-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SAROJAMMA W/O NARAYANAPPA OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE RESIDING OF DODDA YALACHEMANDE VILLAGE KAMASAMDRAM HOBLI BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRADEEP C.S, ADVOCATE-ABSENT)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MULTISTORIED BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶13

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR.

¶14

3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR.

¶15

4 . THE TAHASILDAR BANGARPET TALUK, BANGARPET KOLAR DISTRICT.

¶16

¶17

5 . SMT. NALLAMMA W/O MUNIVENKATAPPA R/O DODDAYALCHAMANDE VILLAGE KAMASAMUDRAM HOBLI BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.D. HARSHA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:19.03.2009 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB-DIVISION IN CASE NO.LNDRUO(A) 07/2008-09 VIDE ANNEX-D AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR IN CASE NO.RA.37/2009-10, DATED:08.09.2010 CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER VIDE ANNEX-E.

¶20

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Petitioner claiming to be in unauthorized

¶23

occupation of land bearing (Sy.No.22) new Sy.No.109 measuring 2 Acres and sought for regularization of her unauthorized occupation of said land by submitting an application to revenue authorities. Said application came to be considered by the Land Grant Committee and Saguvali chit came to be issued on 19.01.1995. Pursuant to which revenue records came to be mutated

¶24

¶25

in her name in M.R.No.2/1995-96 and phodi durasthi

¶26

work was conducted by assigning new Sy.No.109.

¶27

However, fifth respondent herein sought for

¶28

cancellation of said grant made in favour of petitioner by filing a petition under Rule 25 of Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969 contending interalia that she was in occupation of said land and an application had been filed by her for grant of said land and without noticing this fact land had been granted in favour of petitioner erroneously. Said application came to be registered by third respondent in LND RUO (A) 07/2008-09 and notice came to be issued to petitioner. In said proceedings petitioner was represented by a learned counsel. Based on the report of the jurisdictional Thasildar which was to the effect that petitioner though granted land with a condition that she should not sell the same land for 15 years, had sold the same contrary to the conditions stipulated. Hence, third respondent accepting the report of Thaisldar held that there was violation of the grant condition and ordered for

¶29

¶30

forfeiting the land to the Government vide order dated 19.03.2009-Annexure-D.

¶31

Being aggrieved by said order petitioner herein has filed appeal in R.A.No.37/2009-10 under Section 136(2) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 before second respondent. It came to be noticed by the Deputy Commissioner that pursuant to order dated 19.03.2009 passed by third respondent, jurisdictional Thasildar had passed an order on 29.05.2019 in L & DSR 11/2008-09 and had implemented the order of Assistant Commissioner dated 19.03.2009 and as such held appeal–R.A.No.37/2009-10 had become infructuous and rightly so.

¶32

In that view of the matter, reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 29.05.2019 passed in L & DSR 92/08-09 in accordance with law, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

¶35

SD/-

Smt Sarojamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sarojamma v. the State of Karnataka

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

Smt Venkamma S Hegde Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S v Ganapathi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sanjeev Kumar v Rayabhagi Vs Additional Registrar of Co-Opertive Societies

Smt. Vishalakshamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Saraswathamma Vs Deputy Commissioner

M/S Hill Land Properties and Developers Vs the Deputy Commissioner