Allowed

Sri. Sandeep Puri v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Aug 2022WP/5541/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A High Court Bench quashed a forfeiture order passed under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act without notice. Relying on a coordinate Bench, the court remanded the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for a fresh hearing, noting the relevance of subsequent amendments.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 08.06.2007 is quashed. The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration including consequences of the 2020 Amendment.

Sri. Sandeep Puri Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 5541 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 5541 OF 2022 (LR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. SANDEEP PURI, S/O LATE COL. K.K.PURI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO.125, 3^RD FLOOR, GLENMOOR, 3^RD MAIN, DEFENCE COLONY, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 038.

¶10

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER SRI.GAJENDRA, S/O SRI KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OLD KOTHUR ROAD, VIJINAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 016.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶16

¶17

WP No. 5541 of 2022

¶18

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA – 561 205.

¶19

TAHASILDAR, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 562 114.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI.SESHU V., HCGP)

¶22

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.06.2007 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE – A; GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE IMPUGNED DATED 08.06.2007 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE - A.

¶23

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

¶24

ORDER

¶25

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶26

Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for all the respondents.

¶27

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 08.06.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapura Sub-Division, Doddaballapura, 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.

¶28

¶29

WP No. 5541 of 2022

¶30

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

¶31

Learned High Court Government Pleader points

¶32

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.

¶33

It is the contention of the learned High Court Government Pleader that even as per the materials available on record, after forfeiture, the excess lands have been granted by the State Government to third parties. The Assistant Commissioner is therefore required to

¶34

¶35

WP No. 5541 of 2022

¶36

ascertain, whether the forfeited lands still remain with the State Government or has been granted to third parties. If

¶37

the lands have been granted to third party, then subsection(1) of Section 12 of the amending Act will apply to say that the proceedings have reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant Commissioner.

¶38

Having considered the submission of the learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the coordinate 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 coordinate bench should also enure to the petitioner herein.

¶39

Consequently, the writ petition is allowed . The impugned order dated 08.06.2007 passed in case No.L.R.F(H)SR No.42/2005-06 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondentAssistant Commissioner to consider the case of the

¶40

¶41

WP No. 5541 of 2022

¶42

petitioner including the consequences of the subsequent amendment brought to the provisions of Sections 79-A and 78-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.

¶43

The petitioner shall appear before the

¶44

respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 12^th September 2022 , without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

¶45

Ordered accordingly.

¶46

Learned High Court Government Pleader is

¶47

permitted to file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

¶48

Sd/JUDGE

¶49

Sri. Sandeep Puri v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Sandeep Puri v. 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

Sri Thimmarayappa Vs the State of Karnataka

A S Nagaraju Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Shivarama Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

G.R. Eashwarappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohammad Ibrahim Vs the State of Karnataka

Chowdappa Vs State of Karnataka