Dismissed

Harijan B Tippeswamy S/O Late Sannatyappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2022WP/103473/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka directed the Committee for Regularization of Unauthorized Cultivation to reconsider the petitioners' case and take a decision within three months, dismissing the writ petitions after the authority agreed to comply.

What did the court decide?

Directed the fourth respondent to consider the case within three months and take appropriate decision.

Harijan B Tippeswamy S/O Late Sannatyappa Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

W.P. NO.103473 OF 2022 C/W. W.P. NO.103498 OF 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶7

W.P. NO.103473 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) C/W. W.P. NO.103498 OF 2022 (KLR-REG)

¶8

In W.P. No.103473/2022:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

HARIJAN B. TIPPESWAMY, S/O. LATE SANNATAYAPPA, AGE 58 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.: ISHWARANAGAR, 35^TH WARD, HOSPETE, BELLARY.

¶11

… PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001.

¶15

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HOSPET SUB DIVISION, HOSPET 583201.

¶16

THE TAHASHILDAR, HOSPETE, DIST.: BELLARY 583201.

¶17

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR

¶18

COMMITTEE FOR REGULARIZATION OF UNATHORIZED CULTIVATION, BY ITS SECRETARY, HOSPETE, DIST.: BELLARY 583201.

¶19

… RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. VINAYAK S.KULKARNI, AGA)

¶21

¶22

W.P. NO.103473 OF 2022 C/W. W.P. NO.103498 OF 2022

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 4^TH RESPONDENT TO RECONSIDER THE FORM NO.50 AS PER THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DATED 15/11/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

¶24

In W.P. No.103498/2022:

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

SMT. HARIJAN B. S. KAMALAMMA, W/O. SHIVAPPA B., AGE 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.: ISHWARANAGAR, 35^TH WARD, HOSPETE, DIST.: BELLARY.

¶27

… PETITIONER

¶28

(BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)

¶29

AND:

¶30

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001.

¶31

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HOSPET SUB DIVISION, HOSPET 583201.

¶32

THE TAHASHILDAR, HOSPETE, DIST.: BELLARY 583201.

¶33

COMMITTEE FOR REGULARIZATION OF UNATHORIZED CULTIVATION, BY ITS SECRETARY, HOSPETE, DIST.: BELLARY 583201.

¶34

… RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI. VINAYAK S.KULKARNI, AGA)

¶36

¶37

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.

¶38

¶39

W.P. NO.103473 OF 2022 C/W. W.P. NO.103498 OF 2022

¶40

O R D E R

¶41

The case of the petitioners is that, they are in unathorised cultivation of certain lands in Sy.No.96 of Jambunathanahalli of Hosapete Taluka and that, they had made necessary application to respondent No.4 for regularization of their unauthorized cultivation. The same was rejected by respondent No.4. Aggrieved by the same the petitioners preferred Writ Petition Nos.111078/2014 & 111079/2014. The said writ petitions were dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred Writ Appeal Nos.100003/2015 & 100004/2015, wherein the petitioners were given liberty to approach the second respondent – the Assistant Commissioner and accordingly, the petitioners approached the same. After hearing the parties concerned, the second respondent was pleased to pass an order dated 15.11.2018, wherein the case of the petitioners have been remanded back to the fourth respondent with a direction to reconsider their case on merits. In spite of it, the fourth respondent has not taken any action. Aggrieved by the same, the instant writ petitions are filed with a prayer to direct the fourth respondent to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶42

¶43

W.P. NO.103473 OF 2022 C/W. W.P. NO.103498 OF 2022

¶44

Learned AGA upon instructions submits that the case of the

¶45

petitioners shall be considered by the fourth respondent within a period of three months from today and appropriate decision shall be taken.

¶46

His submission is placed on record. Hence, the following:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(i) The fourth respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with law and take appropriate decision within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶49

(ii) No order as to costs.

¶50

(iii) Both writ petitions are disposed off.

¶51

Vnp*

¶52

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

¶53

Sd/JUDGE

Harijan B Tippeswamy S/O Late Sannatyappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harijan B Tippeswamy S/O Late Sannatyappa 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

Prof.Maruti Appayya Kadam Vs the Commissioner for Collegiate Education

Maruti Ramu Ghatage Vs Cosmos Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Basavaraj S/O Channappa Hadapad @ Gokak Vs the Karnataka University

Shri. Syed Khaja Ameenuddin Hussaini Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Gopal S/O Hanamanth Kase Vs the State of Karnataka

Hanumappa S/O Late Mahadevappa Hosalli Vs the Land Tribunal Ranebennur