Disposed

Sri. Revanna Siddappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Jul 2021WP/4901/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 seeking directions to the Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk to consider representations and conduct survey of lands in specified Survey Numbers under Muddayyana Palya Village.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed with liberty to file detailed representations within 2 weeks; Respondent to inform status within 4 weeks.

Sri. Revanna Siddappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

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

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.48712/2017 (KLR-RR/SUR) C/W WRIT PETITION Nos.48688/2017, 48696/2017, 4901/2021 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶7

IN W.P.NO.48712/2017:

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

SRI.REVANNA SIDDAPPA, S/O LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

¶10

SRI.REVANNA, S/O LATE MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶11

SMT. BENGALOORAMMA, W/O LATE CHIKKA REVANNA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

¶12

SRI.HONNAPPA,

¶13

S/O LATE CHIKKA REVANNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶14

SRI. RENUKAIAH, S/O LATE CHIKKA REVANNA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶15

¶16

ALL ARE RESIDING AT HALBAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, RAMOHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 074.

¶17

ALL ARE RESPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

¶18

SRI.RAMACHANDRA, S/O LATE PEDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT HALLBAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, RAMOHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 074. (BY SRI.GAGAN DEEP C.M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.L.GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶19

… PETITIONERS

¶20

AND :

¶21

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶22

THE TAHASILDAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, GROUND FLOOR, KANDAYAM BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶23

… RESPONDENTS

¶24

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

¶25

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER TO SURVEY THE PROPERTY, DHURASHTI AND ISSUE THATHAKAL PHODI IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING IN SY.NO.28/7, MEASURING 6 ACRES, OF MUDDAYYANA PALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK.

¶27

IN W.P.NO.48688/2017:

¶28

BETWEEN:

¶29

SMT. MUDDAMMA, W/O LATE BENGALOORAIAH, DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF LATE POOJARI BENGALOORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS,

¶30

SRI. BENGALOORAIAH, S/O LATE BENGALOORAIAH, GRAND SON OF LATE POOJARI BENGALOORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

¶31

SMT. LAKSHMAMMA, W/O LATE KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶32

SRI.DEERESH, S/O LATE KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

¶33

SRI. KRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,

¶34

¶35

SRI.KRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE BENGALOORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

¶36

SRI. RENUKAIAH, S/O LATE NINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶37

SRI.PUTTAREVAIAH, S/O LATE NINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

¶38

ALL ARE RESIDING AT HALLBAVIPALA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, RAMOHALLI POST, BANGALORE - 560 074.

¶39

ALL ARE RESPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

¶40

SRI.RAMACHANDRA, S/O LATE PEDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT HALLBAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, RAMOHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 074. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI.GAGAN DEEP C.M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.L.GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶41

AND :

¶42

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

¶43

¶44

REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶45

THE TAHASILDAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, GROUND FLOOR, KANDAYAM BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶46

… RESPONDENTS

¶47

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

¶48

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2, CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER TO SURVEY THE PROPERTY, DHURASHTI AND ISSUE THATHKAL PHODI IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING IN SY.NO.28/5, MEASURING 5 ACRE 18 GUNTAS, AND IN SY.NO.28/6, MEASURING 6 ACRES, SITUTATED AT MUDDAYYANNA PALYA, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK.

¶49

IN W.P.NO.48696/2017:

¶50

BETWEEN:

¶51

SRI.SHIVASHANKARAIAH, S/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,

¶52

SMT. PUTTAREVAMMA, W/O LATE PEDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS,

¶53

SRI. RAMAIAH, S/O PEDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,

¶54

¶55

SRI. HANUMANTHAIAH, S/O PEDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

¶56

SRI. RAMACHANDRA, S/O PEDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶57

SRI.PRABHU, S/O MUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶58

SRI.VIJAY KUMAR, S/O MUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

¶59

SRI. HEMANTH KUMAR, S/O MUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶60

SRI. VISHWANATHA, S/O MUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶61

SMT.THARA, W/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶62

SRI.MAHESH, S/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶63

SRI. MURTHY, S/O RAMALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶64

¶65

SRI.HANUMANTHA, S/O RAMALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶66

SRI. SHANKARA, S/O RAMALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶67

SRI.SHIVU, S/O RAMALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

¶68

SRI.RAMEGOWDA, S/O LATE SHIVARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶69

ALL ARE RESIDING AT HALLBAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVEREKERE HOBLI, RAMOHALLI POST, BANGALORE - 560 074.

¶70

ALL ARE RESPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

AND :

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶75

THE TAHASILDAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, GROUND FLOOR, KANDAYAM BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶76

… RESPONDENTS

¶77

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

¶78

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT THE R-2, CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER TO SURVEY THE PROPERTY, DHURASTH AND ISSUE THATHKAL PHODI IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING IN SY.NO.28/1, 28/2 & 28/3 OF MUDDAYYANA PALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK.

¶79

IN W.P.NO.4901/2021:

¶80

BETWEEN:

¶81

SRI.REVANNA SIDDAPPA, S/O DODDAREVANNA, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,

¶82

SRI. REVANNA, S/O LATE VEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,

¶83

¶84

SRI.NANAJUNDAPPA, S/O LATE VEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,

¶85

SRI.SUDHARSHAN, D/O LATE MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

¶86

SRI.VISHWANATH, D/O LATE MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

¶87

ALL ARE RESIDING AT HALLBAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVEREKERE HOBLI, RAMOHALLI POST, BANGALORE - 560 074.

¶88

ALL ARE RESPRESENTED BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

¶89

¶90

AND :

¶91

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,

¶92

¶93

MULTISTORIED BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶94

THE TAHASILDAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, GROUND FLOOR, KANDAYAM BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶95

… RESPONDENTS

¶96

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

¶97

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT THE R-2, CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER TO SURVEY THE PROPERTY VIDE ANNEXURE-F DHURASTHI AND ISSUE THATHKAL PHODI IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY IN SY.NO.28/A, MEASURING 6 ACRE 10 GUNTAS OF MUDDAYYANA PALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK AND ETC.,

¶98

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING;

¶99

O R D E R

¶100

The petitioners who are similarly placed have filed these petitions for a direction to the Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk [the second respondent] to consider their representations and conduct survey of the lands in Sy.Nos.28/1 to 28/7 of Muddayyana Palya Village,

¶101

¶102

Tavarekere Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk ('the subject lands'). The petitioners assert grant of the respective portions in the subject lands in favour of their ancestors by the Government Order No.64/1927-28. The petitioners contend that the second respondent’s refusal to initiate survey proceedings gives them the cause for the recent petition.

¶103

The petitioners in W.P.No.4901/2021, prior to the date of this petition, have been issued with an endorsement dated 25.07.2018 by the second respondent stating that the survey proceedings for the subject lands cannot be initiated at their instance as it is verified by his office that the records relating to the Government Order No.64/1927-28 are not available, and because the petitioners have furnished certain documents belatedly. These petitioners have withdrawn their earlier writ petition in W.P.Nos.48717-48721/2017 with liberty to approach this Court, if occasion arises. The learned counsel for the

¶104

¶105

petitioners submits that these petitioners are constrained to approach this Court because no action has been taken after the endorsement dated 25.07.2018 though some documents are submitted.

¶106

Sri.Prashant K.H, Revenue Inspector, Bengaluru South Taluk, who is present with the records, submits that Muddayyana Palya Village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk was originally with Magadi taluk and his office has written to the concerned from the said taluk to verify the details of the grants as asserted by the petitioners and based on the information received from the Magadi Taluk office, the petitioners’ representation would be considered in accordance with law.

¶107

In the light of this submission, the petitions stand disposed of with liberty to each of the petitioners to file a detailed representation with the second respondent/the Tahsildar, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru enclosing a certified copy of this order seeking for the status of their

¶108

¶109

representation for durast [survey] of the subject lands. The petitioners are at liberty to file such representation within two [2] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The second respondent within four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, inform the petitioners about the status of their representation. The petitioners shall be at liberty to avail such opportunity as may be permissible in law based on the information that is given to them by the second respondent in consideration of their representation.

¶110

SD/JUDGE

¶111

cbc

Sri. Revanna Siddappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Revanna Siddappa 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajanna H D Vs the State of Karnataka Represented by

Smt Shanthamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Shanthamma S Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Manjula S Vs Smt Mahadevi L P

Smt. D Indramma Vs the State Government

Theosophical Society Vs the State of Karnataka