Disposed

Ramachandra v. the Tahsildar and Secretary

Karnataka HC17 Aug 2022WP/6250/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court of Karnataka disposed of this writ petition by directing the Tahsildar to submit the petitioner's application to the regularization Committee for reconsideration within three months, as the matter had been remanded by the Assistant Commissioner. No separate headnote or reason was provided.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed the Tahsildar to place the petitioner's application before the Committee for regularization for reconsideration and directed the Committee to pass orders within three months.

Ramachandra Vs the Tahsildar and Secretary — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 6250 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 6250 OF 2022 (KLR-REG)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

RAMACHANDRA S/O LATE DEYVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT BEEMANERI, M L HALLI POST SAGAR TALUK-577401 SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. ESWARAPPA B J.,ADVOCATE) (PH)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE TAHSILDAR AND SECRETARY COMMITTEE FOR THE REGULARISATION OF UNAUTHORIZED CULTIVATION OF LANDS, SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577401

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SAGAR SUB DIVISION SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577401

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETTION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS FILED PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 THE TAHSIDAR AND SECRETARY COMMITTEE

¶19

¶20

WP No. 6250 of 2022

¶21

FOR THE REGULARISATION OF UNAUTHORISED CULTIVATION OF LANDS, SAGAR TALUK TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 16.08.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R-1 AT ANNX-C.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for both the respondents.

¶26

The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the direction given by the Assistant Commissioner, Sagara Sub Division in a batch of disputes, including dispute No.113/2003-04 dated 11.03.2004, remanding the matter

¶27

back to the Committee for regularization of unauthorized occupation to reconsider the application filed in Form No.50 at the hands of all the appellants therein, no orders have been passed by the Committee. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submits that a direction may be issued to the 1st respondent-Tahsildar to place the application filed by the petitioner in terms of the direction

¶28

¶29

WP No. 6250 of 2022

¶30

issued by the Assistant Commissioner before the Committee for regularization of unauthorized occupation and the committee may be directed to consider and pass necessary orders.

¶31

Having regard to the prayer made in the writ petition and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that when once the Assistant Commissioner has set aside the earlier resolution dated 29.01.1997 passed by the Committee rejecting the application and remanded the matter back to the Committee for reconsideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to the applicants and causing an enquiry as contemplated in the circular issued by the State Government, the Committee was required to reconsider and pass necessary orders.

¶32

Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to the Tahsildar, Sagara Taluka to place the application of the petitioner before the

¶33

¶34

WP No. 6250 of 2022

¶35

Committee for regularization of unauthorized occupation as was directed by the Assistant Commissioner in his order dated 11.03.2004 in dispute bearing No.113/2003-04 and the Committee shall reconsider the application of the petitioner, causing an enquiry and following the procedures as contemplated in the Rules, governing regularization of unauthorized occupation and the circulars issued by the state government, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

Ramachandra v. the Tahsildar and Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandra v. the Tahsildar and Secretary

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

Haneef Sab Vs the Tahsildar

Shri Gange Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs. Muneera Begum Vs Government of Karnataka

Muneppa @Moogappa Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Sri G P Basavarajappa Vs the Principal Secretary

Mahesh Vs State of Karnataka