Remanded

Sri N Ramesh Naidu v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Aug 2022WP/9465/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka quashed an order of forfeiture passed by the Assistant Commissioner under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act without hearing the petitioner. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration following precedents and to account for subsequent statutory amendments.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 24.07.2013 is quashed and set aside; the matter is remanded back to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration with notice to the petitioner to appear by 12 September

Sri N Ramesh Naidu Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 9465 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 9465 OF 2021 (LR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI N RAMESH NAIDU S/O NARAYANA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT OPP. KPTCL

¶9

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

HANUR TOWN

¶11

KOLLEGALA TALUK-571440 CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT

¶12

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKER M B., ADVOCATE)

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLLEGALA SUB DIVISION KOLLEGALA-571440

¶17

THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR HANUR, KOLLEGALA TALUK-571440 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. SESHU.V, HCGP)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE/QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE

¶21

¶22

WP No. 9465 of 2021

¶23

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLLEGLA, SUB DIVISION i.e., ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN CASE NO.LRF87/2011-12, DATED 24.7.13 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶24

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

¶25

ORDER

¶26

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶27

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

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 24.07.2013 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Kollegala Sub-Division, Kollegala, under the provisions of Section 83 for violation of the provisions contained in Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

WP No. 9465 of 2021

¶32

for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of

¶33

hearing to the aggrieved person.

¶34

Learned High Court Government Pleader 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.

¶35

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 ascertain, whether the forfeited lands still remain with the State Government or has been granted to third parties. If the lands have been granted to third party, then sub-section(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.

¶36

¶37

WP No. 9465 of 2021

¶38

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.

¶39

Consequently, the writ petition is allowed . The impugned order dated 24.07.2013 passed in case No.LRF:87/2011-12 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner 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.

¶40

The petitioner shall appear before the respondentAssistant Commissioner on 12^th September 2022 , without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

¶41

Ordered accordingly.

¶42

¶43

WP No. 9465 of 2021

¶44

Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted

¶45

to file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks

¶46

from today.

¶47