Disposed

M C Basavaraju v. the Secretary

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2021WP/14931/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227, the Karnataka High Court disposed of the matter by directing the petitioner to apply to the Assistant Director of Land Records for durasti and phodi. The department had clarified that such records must now be initiated by the Assistant Director. The Court mandated the department to act within eight weeks of receiving the application.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit application to Assistant Director of Land Records within four weeks; department to act and inform within eight weeks.

M C Basavaraju Vs the Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 14931/2019 (KLR/RES)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

M. C. BASAVARAJU S/O LATE CHANNAPPA @ CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O STATE BANK OF ROAD MADDUR TOWN MANDYA - 571 428.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. PRAMOD. R., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 01.

¶12

THE TAHSILDAR MADDUR DIVISION MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 428.

¶13

... RESPONDENTS

¶14

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

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2^ND RESPONDENT I.E.,

¶16

¶17

TAHASILDAR TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION AT ANNEXURE 'D' DATED 20.03.2018.

¶18

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

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate, who accepts notice for the respondents, are heard for final disposal. The petitioner has filed this petition for a writ of mandamus to the second respondent/the Tahsildar, Maddur Division, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2018 (Annexure-D).

¶21

The petitioner contends that his grandfather,

¶22

Sri. Doddachannappa, was granted the land measuring 2 acres in Sy.No.194 of Belathur Village, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, and in the partition amongst his legal heirs after his demise, the petitioner, who is his grandson, is allotted 1 acre in Sy.No.194 of Belathur Village, Maddur

¶23

¶24

Taluk, Mandya District, and the wife of son of Sri. Doddachannappa, Smt. Parvathamma is granted the other extent of 41 guntas in Sy.No.194. The revenue records for the extent of 1 acre in Sy.No.194 are made in the name of the petitioner vide the M.R.No.24/93-94. The RTC continues in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner has submitted representation for durasti and phodi of the subject land, but action has not been taken on such application.

¶25

The learned Additional Government Advocate, while not disputing the authenticity of the revenue entries in M.R.No.24/93-94 relied upon by the petitioner, submits that presently, all durasti and phodi will have to be initiated by the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records, and if appropriate application is submitted by the petitioner to the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records, the needful would be done within a reasonable time.

¶26

¶27

In the light of these submissions, the petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit an application for durasti and phodi of the subject land with the Assistant Director of Land Records, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, within four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, enclosing a copy of the order. The Assistant Director of Land Records, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, shall take necessary action on such application and inform the petitioner about the action initiated within eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of such application.

¶28

SD/JUDGE

¶29

M C Basavaraju v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M C Basavaraju v. the Secretary

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 Chinnamma Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Pg Setty Construction Technology Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

Renukamba Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Domappa Vs the Assistnat Commissioner

Sri Nagaraju P Vs the Karnataka Government

Smt. Kamala C Vs the State of Karnataka