Disposed

S. Shivaram v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jul 2022WP/5339/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ direction to Deputy Commissioner to approve alienation of granted land. Court styled DP as statutorily obliged to consider request within two months or forward to appropriate authority if lacking jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Deputy Commissioner to consider alienation request within two months or forward to appropriate authority if lacking jurisdiction.

S. Shivaram Vs State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.5339 OF 2019 (KLR RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

S.SHIVARAM, S/O LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.408, 7^TH CROSS, GANDHINAGAR, MANDYA DIST - 571 401.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND :

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, MYSORE REVENUE DIVISION, MYSORE - 570 001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX, MANDYA CITY, MANDYA DIST - 571 401.

¶15

... RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. V.SESHU, HCGP)

¶17

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO RESPONDENT NOs.2 AND 3 TO ACT OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.07.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURES-K AND L RESPECTIVELY.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner is the successor in the interest of grantee who was granted land bearing Sy.No.54 situated at Guttalu Village, Kottatti Hobli, Mandya Taluk. It is his grievance that his request for alienating the "granted land" has not been accorded approval by the Deputy Commissioner despite two representations given in that regard. The copies of the representations are produced at Annexures 'K' and 'L' respectively..

¶22

In my view, since a request is made by the

¶23

successor in interest of the grantee to alienate the granted land, the Deputy Commissioner is statutorily obliged to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in

¶24

¶25

accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶26

The Deputy Commissioner shall take into consideration the fact that the petitioner has already purchased an alternative land and therefore he would be entitled to sell the granted land.

¶27

In case the Deputy Commissioner does not have jurisdiction or is not empowered to consider the request, the Deputy Commissioner shall forward the same to the appropriate authority and the appropriate authority shall take action to consider the request of the petitioner.

¶28

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

GPG

S. Shivaram v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Shivaram v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Anusuyamma S Vs the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate

Vittala Shetty Vs the Deputy Commissiner

Sri. Appajigowda Vs Assistant Comissioner

Sri.T.K.Krishna Prasad Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Y T Narendra Babu Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Muddu @ Madhu Vs the State of Karnataka