Disposed

The State of Karnataka v. the Land Tribunal

Karnataka HC19 Oct 2022WP/75864/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order granting occupancy rights. The court held that relief sought did not survive as the underlying order was already quashed, but temporarily directed that alleged police possession remain undisturbed pending further Form No.7 consideration.

What did the court decide?

Relief sought in the writ petition does not survive. Pending stay granted on possession of the Reserved Police.

The State of Karnataka Vs the Land Tribunal — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 75864 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 75864 OF 2013 (LR-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE.

¶10

POLICE TRAINING SCHOOL KHANAPUR, BELGAUM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL AND SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE.

¶11

(BY SRI. M.H.PATIL, AGA)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE LAND TRIBUNAL REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KHANAPUR TALUK, KHANAPUR.

¶14

NARAYANA S/O THAMMANNA SHANBHAGUE, AGE: MAJOR, RESIDING AT KSRP ROAD, KHANAPUR, KHANAPUR TQ, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶15

JAMALUDDIN S/O LATE SULEMAN MATHIKOP AGED: ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶16

MEHBOOB BI W/O ABDUL GAMI MATHIKOP, AGE: MAJOR,

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

¶19

WP No. 75864 of 2013

¶20

OCC: NIL, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶21

KHAIRUN R MUJAWAR D/O LATE ABDUL LGHANI MATHIKOP AGED: ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶22

SUBIADA RAHIM MOMIN D/O LATE ABDUL LGHANI MATHIKOP AGED: ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶23

BASHORA W/O NAZEER MATHIKOP AGED: ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶24

ANSAR S/O NAZEER AHMED MATHIKOP AGED: ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶25

MOHAMMAD SHAFI S/O LATE ABDUL GHANI MATHIKOP AGED: ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O: MANASAPUR VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELGAUM DISTRICT.

¶26

SACHIDANANDA SARASWATHI SWAMI KAVALEMUTT, PONDA TALUK, GOA. …RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. DINESH M. KULKARNI, ADV. FOR R3 TO R7 & R9, R8 & R10 ARE SERVED)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:04/02/2004 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT LAND TRIBUNAL AND COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H.

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

WP No. 75864 of 2013

¶32

ORDER

¶33

The State of Karnataka has filed this writ petition

¶34

challenging the order dated 04.02.2004 passed by the respondent No.1-Land Tribunal granting occupancy rights in respect of Sy. No.35, Sy. No.36A and Sy. No.36B, all situated at Bankapur Village, Khanapur in favour of respondent No.2. The very impugned order was challenged by the respondent Nos.3 to 6 herein before this Court in W.P. No.11359/2007. This Court by order dated 13.12.2021 quashed the order impugned herein and remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal to consider applications filed by the Private respondents herein afresh and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶35

In view of the same, the relief sought for in the writ petition does not survive for consideration.

¶36

Till consideration of the Form No.7, the alleged possession of the Karnataka Reserve Police in respect of Sy. No.35, Sy. No.36A and Sy. No.36B of Bankapur Village, Khanapur shall not be disturbed.

¶37

All contentions are kept open.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

RSH

¶40

LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 32

The State of Karnataka v. the Land Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Karnataka v. the Land Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash S/O. Rangappa Kolli Vs the Deputy Director of

Suresh S/O Ishwarappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Bhima Kallappa Waghmode Vs the State of Karnataka

Nagangouda S/O Parvatgouda Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

Mahabaleshwar S/O.Gopal Gaddemane, Vs the Branch Manager, Vikas Urban Co-Operative Bank

Pakakiravva W/O Shivputtrappa Sungar Vs the State of Karnataka