Allowed

Smt. Nanjamma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Sept 2021WP/11318/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition to enforce a Committee's decision dated 05.03.2019 mandating survey, phodi, and durasti proceedings on their land. The Single Judge held that since the respondents were part of the Committee that gave the direction, a writ of mandamus was issued enforcing the implementation.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus issued directing Respondents No. 2, 3, and 6 to carry out survey, phodi, and durasti proceedings within four months.

Smt. Nanjamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.11318 OF 2021 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. NANJAMMA W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA G.M. AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS

¶9

SRI VIJAYAKUMAR S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA G.M. AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶10

SMT. CHANDRAKALA W/O LATE MUNISWAMIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

¶11

SRI VIKAS GOWDA S/O LATE MUNISWAMIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

¶12

KUM. HARSHITHA GOWDA D/O LATE MUNISWAMIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

¶13

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF BUDIGERE VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

¶14

... PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI BASAVARAJU P, ADVOCATE)

¶16

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU - 560 001

¶19

REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶20

THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU - 560 009

¶21

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN BENGALURU - 560 001

¶22

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009

¶23

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVANA BENGALURU - 560 001

¶24

THE TAHASILDAR JALA-3 HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK PRESENTLY YELAHANAKA TALUK YELAHANAKA BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU

¶25

... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SRINIVAS A.R., AGA)

¶26

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTION AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS TO GIVE EFFECT AND IMPLEMENT THE DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE DATED 05.03.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND REQUISITION DATED 07.03.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A1 AND REQUISITION DATED 07.03.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A2 AND ETC.

¶28

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

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶31

" a) To issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction against the Respondents to give effect and implement the decision of the committee No.GY.V.S.S.09/2018-19 dated 05/03/2019 vide Annexure-A and requisition vide No.LND/NA/CR/57/2014-15 dated 07/03/2015 vide Annexure-A1 and requisition vide No.LND/NA/CR/58/ 2014-15 dated 07/03/2015 vide Annexure-A2 and

¶32

b) To issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction against the Respondents to pass necessary orders and conduct phodi & durasthu and assign new survey numbers over the schedule properties of the Petitioners

¶33

¶34

by considering the representations dated 06/09/2019 & 24/09/2019 vide ANNEXURE-B, B1, B2, B3, B4 & B5 respectively and

¶35

c) To allow the writ petition as prayed for and pass such other suitable order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deems to fit and proper to pass in the above said circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶36

The contention of Sri P.Basavaraju, learned counsel for

¶37

the petitioners is that the husband of petitioner No.1 is the original grantee of land bearing Sy.No.89 measuring 4 acres situated at M.Hosahalli, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk which was granted vide Darakastu Grant dated 20.04.1963.

¶38

On 12.12.2013, the husband of petitioner No.1

¶39

and the husband of petitioner No.3 had made separate representations before respondent No.6 -Tahsildar for carrying out phodi and durasti proceedings in respect of the said land, followed by various representations.

¶40

When no action was taken, they approached this Court by filing W.P.Nos.6656-6657/2016 seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct

¶41

¶42

phodi and durasti proceedings which came to be allowed. When the direction issued in the said writ petitions was not complied with, contempt proceedings in CCC Nos.1607-1608/2017 were filed wherein it was contended by the respondents that there are certain legal hurdles on account of pendency of proceedings under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act and therefore, the contempt proceedings were dropped.

¶43

It is further contended that in view of Section 136(3) proceedings, a Committee has been constituted consisting of Deputy Commissioner -respondent No.4 herein, Joint Director of Land Records -respondent No.2 herein, Assistant Commissioner -respondent No.5 herein, Tahsildar -respondent No.6 herein and certain other Tahsildars. The said Committee, vide detailed order dated 05.03.2019, was considering forest lands in and around Bengaluru. Insofar as the land of the petitioners is concerned, the Committee directed respondent Nos.2, 3 and 6 to carry out survey, phodi and durasti proceedings despite which, no action has

¶44

¶45

been taken. Learned counsel further submits that subsequent thereto, the petitioners submitted one more representation on 24.09.2019 despite which, no action has been taken till date.

¶46

The contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners are borne out from the documents produced. There is a categorical direction issued by the Committee vide order dated 05.03.2019 to carry out survey and phodi and durasti proceedings. It was, therefore, required of respondent Nos.2, 3 and 6 to have done the needful when they themselves are parties of the said Committee.

¶47

In view thereof, a mandamus is issued directing respondent Nos.2, 3 and 6 to carry out survey and phodi and durasti proceedings in terms of the decision of the Committee dated 05.03.2019 at Annexure-A within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶48

Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 6 will act on a print out of uploaded copy of this order on the website of this Court,

¶49

¶50

if so furnished by the petitioners, without waiting for certified copy thereof. If the said respondents have any doubt about the order, they may verify the contents of the order from the website of this Court and/or from the learned Additional Government Advocate.

¶51

The petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶52

Sd/JUDGE

¶53

bkv

Smt. Nanjamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nanjamma 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 N Shankaramma Vs the State of Karnataka

Siddanna Vs Smt Manjula

Shantharam Prabhu Vs Mr. K. Dayanand Rai

Shri N.N. Betarayappa Vs Smt. B.K. Roji @ Roji Mary

Smt Areyada S Akkavva Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. P. Madaiah Vs the State of Karnataka