Allowed

Sri Ramappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Feb 2023WP/2485/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition was allowed, granting a writ of mandamus directing the Assistant Commissioner to expeditiously dispose of pending land title proceedings within three months, following a remand by the Deputy Commissioner in an appeal regarding land rights.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 2 to expeditiously dispose of the proceedings in case no. LND/SC.ST(KLR)03/2006/07 within three months.

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

¶1

¶2

WP NO.2485 OF 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 02^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2485 OF 2023 (SC-ST)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. RAMAPPA S/O LATE VENKATARAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/AT GANDHINAGAR, KOLAR TOWN, KOLAR DISTRICT.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR M S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB-DIVISION, KOLAR.

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR.

¶16

ABDUL KHADER @ PYARE JOHN S/O ABDULKHAN AGE: MAJOR.

¶17

¶18

WP NO.2485 OF 2023

¶19

ANJUMKHAN S/O ABDULKHAN AGE: MAJOR.

¶20

GHOUSEKHAN S/O ABDULKHAN AGE: MAJOR.

¶21

AKRAMKHAN S/O PYAREJOHN AGE: MAJOR.

¶22

SRI. NARAYANASWAMY S/O VENKATARAJU AGE: MAJOR. RESPONDENTS 4 TO 8 ARE R/AT GULLPET, KOLAR TOWN, KOLAR DISTRICT – 517 247.

¶23

SRI. S. NAGARAJ S/O B.M. SUBBARAYAPPA AGE: MAJOR R/AT 1^ST CROSS, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, KOLARAMAMMA EXTENSION, KOLAR TOWN, KOLAR DISTRICT – 517 247.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. VENKAT SATYANARAYAN, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 02.02.2023, NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS 4 TO 9 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2-ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB-DIVISION, KOLAR TO DISPOSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.LND/SC-ST(KO)3/2006-07 AS PER NOTICE DATED 21^ST JULY, 2022 AND 12^TH SEPTEMBER, 2022 VIDE ANNEXURES ‘G’ AND ‘H’ RESPECTIVELY, WITHIN A TIME BOUND MANNER; AND ETC.

¶27

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

¶28

¶29

WP NO.2485 OF 2023

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

Sri. Venkat Satyanarayan, learned High Court

¶32

Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1 to 3.

¶33

Notice to respondents 4 to 9 is dispensed with, since no relief is sought against them.

¶34

This petition is preferred by legal representative of the original grantee, seeking direction to the respondent No.2Assistant Commissioner to expeditiously dispose of the matter pertaining to the remand made by the respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner in the appeal preferred by the respondent No.9.

¶35

The respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner by order dated 05^th March, 2015, declared the Sale Deed in favour of respondents as illegal and void and restored the land in favour of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, respondent No.9 in this petition, who was not a party before the Assistant Commissioner, filed an appeal in Case No.PTCL/19/2018 before the respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, questioning the order of the respondent No.2. The respondent No.3 vide order

¶36

dated 29^th June, 2022, set-aside the order of the respondent No.2 dated 05^th March, 2015 and remanded the matter for

¶37

¶38

WP NO.2485 OF 2023

¶39

consideration afresh. Now the matter is pending before the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner for consideration afresh.

¶40

The contention of Sri. M.B. Chandrachooda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that, pursuant to the remand made by the respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner has not taken up the matter for hearing and same is pending for consideration. In view of the same, the petitioner is before this Court seeking direction to the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner to dispose of the matter expeditiously in a time bound manner.

¶41

Sri. Venkat Satayanaran, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 fairly submits that matter would be disposed of expeditiously within a period of three months.

¶42

Placing the submission made by the learned High Court Government Pleader on record, I do not find any legal impediment to allow this petition. Hence, I pass the following:

¶43

¶44

WP NO.2485 OF 2023

¶45

O R D E R

¶46

(i) Writ Petition allowed;

¶47

(ii) Writ of Mandamus is issued directing the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner to expeditiously dispose of the proceedings pending in Case No.LND/SC.ST(KLR)03/200607, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶48

SD/JUDGE

¶49

ARK

Sri Ramappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Ramappa 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

Rashmitha G.T. Vs the Principal

Smt Hemalatha B J @ Sheela Vs Sri.Shadakshari S N

Mr Thejaswi Ketham Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Smt. Shashi Rani Vs Sri T.S. Nagaraju

Mr. Bhavish M Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Abdul Rahman Kalegar Vs State of Karnataka