This High Court Directs the State to remove 'stay for verification' entries in petitioner's alternate land records if verified as genuine.
Directed State officials to remove stay entries if grant found genuine within 30 days and not to disturb petitioner's possession.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.14811 OF 2021 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SIDDESH Y S S/O LATE SIDDALINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O KARAGADA VILLAGE-573115 KASABA HOBALI, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT, PRESENT ADDRESS: YAREHALLI VILLAGE, BELUR TALUKU, HASSAN DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.P. G. YATNAL, ADV.)
AND:
2
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R. SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER DTD.3.10.2019 PASSED BY THE R-2 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO PASS THE ORDERS ON THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.5.2021 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed
to accept notice for the respondents.
3
were acquired by the State Government Karnataka for Hemavathi/Yagachi, Vatehole Irrigation Project.
4
and name of his father was entered in the revenue records. He claimed that respondent No.2 without issuing any notice to the petitioner issued an official memorandum directing the respondent No.3 to enter the words "stay for verification" in Column No.11 of the RTC of all the alternate land granted to the persons who were displaced. The learned counsel contended that this Official Memorandum being without notice is liable to be set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the State Government itself had reserved various survey numbers of Government land which were proposed to be allotted as alternate land to the persons who were displaced by the Hemavathi/Yagachi/Vatehole irrigation project. The father of the petitioner died on 11.08.2018. He invited the attention of the Court to the acquisition and the consequent awards passed and claimed that the father of the petitioner was displaced person who was lawfully granted alternate land and therefore, there was no need to revisit the grants.
5
contended that as per the orders of the State Government, alternate land was allotted to persons who were displaced by the irrigation project. He contended that in many cases grants made did not carry the genuine signatures of the competent authority while some grants were made without there being corresponding documents to indicate that the grantees were displaced persons. Therefore, the State Government had directed the cancellation of such grants in terms of its directions dated 08.02.2018 and an investigation team was constituted in terms of the order dated 18.02.2019. He contended that the investigation team and the Assistant Commissioner met on 12.03.2019 and 27.04.2019, where they decided to re-verify the genuineness/authenticity of all grants made from 01.01.2015 till that date. Therefore, they had resolved that till conclusion of such investigation, appropriate entries shall be made in the revenue records that the same are stayed pending enquiry. He stated that the State Government appointed a Committee of enquiry in terms of
6
an order dated 06.02.2020. The Commissioner for Rehabilitation and Resettlement and Ex-Officio Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue was appointed as an Enquiry Officer who was directed to conclude the proceedings within three months. He stated that proceedings of the enquiry was held which however was delayed due to Covid-19 pandemic. He contended that the Government Order dated 06.06.2020 was modified by Government Order dated 01.09.2021 giving a definite mandate to enquire into grants made from the year 2005 and prescribing time line for conclusion and also providing additional staff to the enquiry officer. He submitted that the enquiry would now be concluded within six months. He further stated that this Court has taken note of the proceedings in W.P.No.6946/2021 and has granted time to conclude the proceedings. He stated that the said order was followed in W.P.No.14122/2021 and a series of writ petitions. He submitted that entertaining these petitions would result in stalling the enquiry and prayed to dismiss these writ petitions.
7
petitioners and the State Government.
| Sl. No. |
Project | Land Acquired |
Alternate Land Allotted |
Govern ment Order |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Yagachi | Sy.Nos.37/1, 35/3 and 38/5 of Shettigere |
4 acres in Sy.No.13 of Devalapura Village |
YA.BOO. MA(DA) 108/13- 14 |
8
the occupant of such land. Therefore, it is bound to also know the extent of land to be allotted as an alternate land. If it is of the opinion that these are glaring irregularities/illegalities in the grant of alternate land, it has to definitely undo the same. However, in the process, those displaced persons who are lawfully granted alternate land cannot be harassed. If the enquiry officer finds that the petitioner is displaced person and that there is some irregularity in the manner of grant of alternate land, such as the grant not being processed through proper channel, then such grants shall not be disturbed. However, the concerned officials responsible for such irregularity may be proceeded against. In so far as those grants which are perse illegal such as those made to those persons who are not displaced by the project or to members belonging to the same family, the enquiry officer is at liberty to suggest remedial measures including cancellation of such grants and to proceed against all officials concerned.
9
10
9. This writ petition is disposed off on the above
terms.
In view of the disposal of this writ petition, I.A.No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration and the same is rejected.
The learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within two weeks from today.
Sd/JUDGE
NBM
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the stay order on alternate land granted to displaced persons warrants removal during pending verification of genuineness.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim directions to remove 'stay for verification' entries in revenue records.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SIDDESH Y S
STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT
THE TAHASILDAR BELUR
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATI CANAL PROJECT
THE COMMISSIONER FOR REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT
R. NATARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
