Allowed

Smt Hanumakka v. the Adhyaksha

Karnataka HC16 Sept 2022WP/13563/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition challenged an order by the Adhyaksha Zilla Panchayat directing registration of a Khata in the fourth respondent's name. The Court held that since the Act provides no statutory right to appeal to the Adhyaksha against an order under Section 269, the impugned appeal order was without authority of law and was quashed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 09.08.2011 passed by the First Respondent in Appeal No.17/2006-07 is quashed.

Smt Hanumakka Vs the Adhyaksha — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.13563/2017 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

SMT HANUMAKKA @ HANUMAVVA W/O LATE ARJUNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O HOUSE NO.31, SHIRAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAGAGANDAHALL GRAMA BALLUR POST TALUK AND DISTRICT DAVANAGERE 577525

¶9

HANUMANTHAPPA S/O LATE ARJUNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC COOLIE, R/O HOUSE NO.31, SHIRAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAGAGANDAHALL GRAMA BALLUR POST TALUK AND DISTRICT DAVANAGERE 577525

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI.R.B.DESHPANDE, ADV.)

¶12

AND :

¶13

THE ADHYAKSHA ZILLA PANCHAYAT, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

¶14

¶15

DAVANAGERE 577501

¶16

EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYAT, DAVANAGERE AT DAVANAGERE 577501

¶17

THE SECRETARY KANAGANDANAHALLI GRAM PANCHAYATH, DAVANAGERE TALUK 577525

¶18

SRI K SHIVAPPA S/O LATE KADLEGUNDI BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT SHIRAGANAHALLI GRAM, DAVANAGERE TALUKA 577525

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI.N.R.JAGADEESHWARA, ADV FOR R2 AND R3; SRI.B.M.SIDDAPPA, ADV FOR R4; R1-SERVED)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 09.08.2011 IN APPEAL NO.17/2006-07 PASSED BY THE ADHYAKSHA, Z.P. DAVANAGERE/ THE R-1 AS PER ANNX-S AND CONSEQUENTLY TO RETAIN/RESTORE THE KHATA OF THE PERTIITONERS IN RESPECT OF KHANESHMARI NO. 45, 46 AND 47 MEASURING 108' X 48' SITUATED AT SHIRANGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAGAGANDAHALLI GRAM, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT AND ETC.,

¶22

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

¶23

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The fourth respondent challenged the order passed

¶26

by the third respondent rejecting the application submitted by him for registering the Khata in his favour in respect of the subject property on the basis of an unregistered sale deed. The said order was challenged by the fourth respondent by filing an appeal under Section 269 (1) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act') before the second respondent.

¶27

The second respondent dismissed the appeal

¶28

on the ground that the fourth respondent is not entitled for registration of Khata on the basis of unregistered sale deed. Against which the fourth respondent filed an appeal under Section 237(3) of the Act before the first respondent. The first respondent allowed the appeal and directed the third respondent to register the Khata in favour of the fourth respondent. Against which the present petition is filed.

¶29

¶30

I have examined the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties.

¶31

Section 237(3) of the Act provides for

¶32

suspending the execution of orders or resolution of Taluk Panchayat by the Adhyaksha of Zilla Panchayat only if such order or resolution is unjust, unlawful or improper or caused injury or annoyance to public or leads to breach of public peace.

¶33

Against the order passed under Section 269

¶34

of the Act, there is no statutory appeal provided under the Act to file an appeal before the first respondent. In the absence of source of power, the appeal order passed by the first respondent is held to be one without authority of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i. Writ petition is allowed.

¶37

ii. The impugned order dated 09.08.2011 passed by the first respondent in appeal No.17/2006-07 at Annexure-S is hereby quashed.

¶38

¶39

iii. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are at liberty

¶40

to agitate their grievance before the appropriate

¶41

forum.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

RKA

Smt Hanumakka v. the Adhyaksha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Hanumakka v. the Adhyaksha

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. Mangala Vs State of Karnataka

Sapthagiri Institute of Medical Sciences Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Chikkachowdappa Vs the Commissioner

K P Rajesh Vs the Panchayath Development Officer

M/S Indus Towers Ltd. Vs the Commissioner

Sri M Lokesh Vs the Deputy Commissioner