Disposed

Vasantha v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Sept 2023WP/19831/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition filed by land grantees challenging a government order constituting a committee to enquire into the validity of their land grants. The court held the petition premature but directed the enquiry to be for internal purposes only and prohibited dispossession until lawful action is taken after hearing the grantees.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to restrict the enquiry to internal purposes; no dispossession of grantees until lawful action after hearing.

Vasantha Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.19831 OF 2023 (KLR-LG)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

VASANTHA

¶7

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶8

S/O RAGHAVA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT D NO.1-120/6A

¶9

MALYODI HOUSE

¶10

ULI VILLAGE AND POST BANTWAL TALUK

¶11

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574326.

¶12

SANTHOSH GOWDA

¶13

S/O BALAKRISHNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/T NO.2-92/2, GOLITHABETTU HOUSE RAYEE VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574211.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. ROHITH B.J. ADV.,)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560001.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶20

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALURU, D.K. - 575001.

¶21

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALORE SUB DIVISION MANGALORE

¶22

DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575001.

¶23

THE TAHSILDAR BANTWAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575001.

¶24

THE TAHASILDAR MULKI TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575002.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY MS.ANUKANKSHA K, HCGP)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ORDER OR DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. NCR/CR/107/2023/E-246031 DATED 10/08/2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E PASSED BY R3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER. GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE ORDER BEARING NO. NCR/CR/107/2023/E-246031 DATED 10/08/2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E PASSED BY R3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER.

¶28

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

¶29

¶30

NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking prayer to issue writ in the nature of certiorari to set aside the order dated 10.08.2023 passed by respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner as at Annexure-E to the writ petition, wherein a Committee has been constituted by respondent No.3 consisting of various officers referred in the impugned order for the purpose of looking into the validity or otherwise of the grant made in favour of 74 persons in respect of the various survey properties by the land grant committee for the period from 2018 to 2022.

¶33

2. Sri.Rohith B.J., learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed an application for grant of land as unauthorized occupants and pursuant to the said application the Committee for Regularization of Unauthorised Occupants has granted land measuring 0.73 acres and 0.85 acres in Sy.Nos.111/1 and Sy.No.185/3 of Rayee Village, Bantwal Taluk and land

¶34

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶35

measuring 0.60 acres in Sy.No.80/P1 of Uli Village, land measuring 3.65 acres & 0.55 acres in Sy.Nos.43 and 77/1

¶36

in Tenkakajekar Village, Bantwal Taluk in their favour. It is submitted that an anonymous complaint has been filed claiming to be the villagers with the respondent No.2 alleging that the grant made in favour of 74 persons are illegal and contrary to the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, ' the Act' ), Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 (for short, 'the Rules' ) and the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969. It is further submitted that the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner has forwarded the said complaint to the respondent No.3Assistant Commissioner vide communication dated 17.07.2023 with a direction to conduct a detailed enquiry. The respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner has constituted a Committee comprising of the Tahasildar, Mulki Taluk and five other revenue officers of the neighbouring villages and entrusted task of looking into 74 grants made between the year 2018 and 2022 in Bantwal

¶37

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶38

Taluk and submit report as to whether the grants are made in violation of the Rule 108F of the Rules. It is also submitted that a bare perusal of the order discloses that the Committee has been empowered to verify the records, conduct spot inspection and to ascertain whether the grantees are in possession and in cultivation of such lands. Further directed to submit report within 45 days. It is submitted that the constitution of such Committee is without jurisdiction, hence, he seeks to allow the writ petition by quashing Annexure-E dated 10.08.2023.

¶39

3. Per contra, Ms.Anukanksha K., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents-State submits that the above writ petition is liable to be rejected as premature as no cause of action has arisen. The revenue authorities have not taken any steps to cancel the grant of the petitioners. The action of respondent No.3 as at Annexure-E is based on a complaint received as at Annexure-C and conducting of any enquiry and verifying of records is always available to the revenue authorities

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶41

¶42

under the provisions of the Act and the Rules, hence, she sought to dismiss the writ petition.

¶43

4. I have heard Sri.Rohith B.J., learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms.Anukanksha K., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the material available on record.

¶44

5. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have been granted land measuring 0.73 acres and 0.85 acres in Sy.Nos.111/1 and Sy.No.185/3 of Rayee Village, Bantwal Taluk and land measuring 0.60 acres in Sy.No.80/P1 of Uli Village, land measuring 3.65 acres & 0.55 acres in Sy.Nos.43 and 77/1 in Tenkakajekar Village, Bantwal Taluk by the Committee for Regularization of Unauthorised Occupants and issued saguvali-chit as at Annexures-A and B and they are in possession of the granted land. When things stood thus, it appears that certain persons have filed a complaint with respondent No.2 alleging that the grants made during the year 2018 to 2022 in Bantwal

¶45

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶46

Taluk are made in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules, and the grants are made without looking into their eligibility criteria. The said revenue authorities have taken cognizance of the said complaint and constituted a Committee at Annexure-E to enquire into the issue as to whether the grants made by the Committee for Regularisation of Unauthorized Occupants has considered the required aspect and submit repot.

¶47

6. Admittedly, no cause of action has arisen to file the present writ petition pursuant to the impugned official memorandum dated 10.08.2023. However, the petitioners have apprehension that the entire exercise of the revenue authorities are at the instance of busy bodies and politically motivated one, with an intention to settle the personal vendetta.

¶48

7. In the absence of any action or cause, the petitioners cannot maintain the present writ petition. Hence, it would not be appropriate for this Court to

¶49

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶50

exercise writ jurisdiction by quashing the impugned order dated 10.08.2023 as at Annexure-E. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that without going into the jurisdiction and competence of the revenue authorities to hold enquiry into the grant of land made in favour of the petitioners, the writ petition be disposed of with a specific direction to the respondents that the enquiry contemplated at Annexure-E dated 10.08.2023 shall be restricted for their internal purpose and based on the said enquiry if the authority intends to take any action against the petitioners, they shall do so only on complying with the various provisions contemplated under the Act and the Rules.

¶51

8. The apprehension of the petitioners that the authorities are likely to dispossess them from the granted land cannot be accepted at this stage. The authorities before taking any action against the petitioners for cancellation of granted land, they shall hear the petitioners

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:32174 WP No.19831 of 2023

¶53

¶54

and take appropriate action as per law and until such action the petitioners shall not be dispossessed.

¶55

9. With the above observations, the writ petition

¶56

stands disposed of .

¶57

Sd/JUDGE

¶58

BSR

Vasantha v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasantha v. the State of Karnataka

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

Sri. C Manjunath Vs Smt. Arpitha

Sri L Siddappa Vs Sri Muniraju

Sri. Gangadharaiah Vs Chandraiah

Smt. Yellamma Vs State of Karnataka

R. Shridhar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Padama Pujari, Vs the State of Karnataka