Allowed

G Balakrishna v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Aug 2022WP/3977/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order of forfeiture under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act passed without notice. The High Court quashed the order and remitted the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration with hearing, relying on a co-ordinate bench decision.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 15.09.2014 quashed and set aside; matter remitted back to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration.

G Balakrishna Vs the State of Karnataka — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 3977 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 3977 OF 2022 (LR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

G. BALAKRISHNA S/O LATE GANGARANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS NO.U-22, 5^TH CROSS DAYANANDANAGAR BHASHYAMNAGAR SRIRAMPURA BENGALURU-560021

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. MARUTHI. S, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING, B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TUMKUR SUB-DIVISION TUMKUR-572101

¶16

THE TAHASILDAR TUMKUR TALUK TUMKUR-572101

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. C.N. MADESHWARAN, AGA)

¶19

¶20

WP No. 3977 of 2022

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE CONCERNED RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD.15.09.2014 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN CASE NO.LRF (79A-79-B) CR 97/ 2006-07 PASSED BY THE R-2 BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE WRIT PETITION.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶25

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15.09.2014 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Tumkur Sub-Division, Tumkur, under the provisions of Section 83 for violation of the provisions in Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

¶26

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice to the petitioner. It is further submitted that under similar circumstances, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.7821/2021 has passed an order dated 16.08.2021 remanding the matter back to the

¶27

¶28

WP No. 3977 of 2022

¶29

Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved person.

¶30

Learned AGA points out from the impugned order that notice was indeed issued to the petitioner and in spite of notice having been issued, the petitioner did not appear before the Assistant Commissioner.

¶31

Having considered the submission of the learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court finds that facts and circumstances in both these matters are quite similar and therefore, the benefit of the decision of the co-ordinate bench should also enure to the petitioner herein.

¶32

Consequently, the impugned order dated 15.09.2014 passed in L.R.F No.(79A-79B)CR 97/200607 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondent-Assistant

¶33

¶34

WP No. 3977 of 2022

¶35

Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner

¶36

including the consequences of the subsequent amendment brought to the provisions of Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.

¶37

The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 25^th August 2022 , without waiting for further notice from the respondent-Assistant Commissioner.

¶38

If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated 15.09.2014, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioner.

¶39

Ordered accordingly.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

G Balakrishna v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G Balakrishna 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Jyothi D Vs the Govt. of Karnataka

Sri N Prakash Vs State of Karnataka

Shri. Chikkarevanna Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri. T Keshavegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri a N Santhoshkumar Vs State of Karnataka

K. Nagesha Vs the Deputy Commissioner