Disposed

Smt Padmabai v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jul 2020WP/5228/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner sought a direction to transfer revenue records of certain lands to her name. The court directed the respondent to consider the pending representation and pass suitable orders within three months, disposing of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider the representation dated 18.07.2018 and pass suitable orders within three months; otherwise, petitioner may take steps available against the respondent.

Smt Padmabai Vs the State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF JULY, 2020

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.5228 OF 2020 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PADMABAI, W/O LATE NARAYANA SINGH D/O LATE SAVITHRI BAI, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO. 20, 2^ND “H” CROSS ROAD, BHOOPASANDRA, 80 FEET ROAD, SANJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU– 560 094.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. A. S. PONNANNA, SENIOR ADV., FOR SMT. LEELA. P. DEVADIGA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

THE TAHSILDAR, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560 067.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU -560 009.

¶15

... RESPONDENTS (BY SRIDHAR, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3)

¶16

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO TRANSFER THE REVENUE RECORDS IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SURVEY NOS. 364 AND

¶17

¶18

365 MEASURING 5 ACRES 19 GUNTAS AND 1 ACRE 30 GUNTAS RESPECTIVELY, SITUATED AT HOSAKOTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER FORTHWITH OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.07.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO TRANSFER THE REVENUE RECORDS TO HER FORTHWITH IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SURVYE NO. 365 AND 364 MEASURING 5 ACRE 19 GUNTAS AND 1 ACRE 30 GUNTAS RESPECTIVELY, SITUATED AT HOSAKOTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, AT ANNEXURE-D.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to transfer the revenue records of Survey Nos.365 and 364 situated at Hosakote village, Kasaba hobli, Bangalore Urban District to her name. she has also sought for an alternate relief to direct the respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 18.07.2018 to transfer the revenue records of the aforesaid land to her name.

¶22

Learned Government Advocate who took notice of this writ petition submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner on

¶23

¶24

18.07.2018 for transfer of khatha would be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders would be passed.

¶25

The petitioner has placed on record a sale deed dated 06.04.1993 in terms of which the mother of the petitioner has purchased the land bearing Survey Nos.365 and 364 situated at Hosakote village, Kasaba hobli, Bangalore Urban District. The petitioner contended that the name of her mother was not entered in the revenue records. She also contended that an application in Form No.7 was filed before the Land Tribunal by Basha Sab and that the Land Tribunal in terms of the order dated 14.09.1979 granted occupancy rights. The order of the Tribunal was thereafter challenged before this court in W.P.No.26140/2003 and this Court set aside the order of the Tribunal and remanded the case for re-consideration. The petitioner further contended that the Land Tribunal rejected the Form No.7 in terms of the order dated 19.12.2017. The petitioner thereafter filed an application on 18.07.2018 before the respondent No.2 and sought transfer of the

¶26

¶27

revenue records to her name. She contended that since there was no claim of any person in respect of the land in question, there is no impediment of whatsoever nature for the respondents to transfer the revenue records to her name.

¶28

The respondent No.2 is the competent authority who is responsible for maintenance of the records relating to the Land revenue. It is not known as to why the representation filed by the petitioner for transfer of the revenue records has been kept pending for almost two years. In the ordinary course, this Court would have called upon the respondent No.2 to explain the reason for the delay in considering the representation. However, having regard to the submission of the learned Government Advocate that the representation would be considered in accordance with law, this Court felt it appropriate not to take any drastic steps.

¶29

In that view of the matter, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider the representation dated

¶30

¶31

18.07.2018 (Annexure-D) filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of the revenue records of the land mentioned above to the name of the petitioner and pass suitable orders within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. If the respondent No.2 fails to comply with this order, the petitioner may take such steps as are available against the respondent No.2. Hence, the Writ petition stands disposed off .

¶32

Sd/- JUDGE

¶33

mbb

Smt Padmabai v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Padmabai 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

K Laxmana Shetty Vs Sri S Sachin

Doddayya Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Akkayamma Vs Lakshmi

Smt. Shailaja Madathil Valappil Vs the State Level Authorization Committee for

Sri. Sharathkumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Srinivas R Vs Kum Divya Srinivas