Disposed

Sri. N. Anjanappa, v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC26 Oct 2023WP/8062/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, petitioners sought a direction to transfer revenue records regarding agricultural land. The court held that since the Assistant Commissioner had allowed the petitioners' appeal and dismissed a rival claim, the High Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the Tahsildar to transfer the records within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ of mandamus issued to the respondent Tahsildar to consider the petitioners' representation and transfer khata and revenue entries in their name for the subject land.

Sri. N. Anjanappa, Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:37999 WP No. 8062 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.8062 OF 2023 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. N. ANJANAPPA, S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,

¶9

SRI. K. ANAND S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶10

SRI. M.K. SURESH S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

¶11

SRI. RAVIKUMAR M.K. S/O K. LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

¶12

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

¶13

ALL ARE RESIDING AT MADAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU-560064.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING,

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC:37999 WP No. 8062 of 2023

¶20

BENGALURU-560001.

¶21

THE TAHSILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560064.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. C.N.MAHADESHWARAN, AGA)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.01.2023 (ANNX-E) AND TRANSFER THE REVENUE RECORDS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SURVEY NO.61 MEASURING 4 ACRE 23 GUNTAS SITUATED AT MADAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DIST, PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED 14.12.2022 IN CASE NO. RA (YLK) 203/2021 PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB - DIVISION BENGALURU (ANNX-D) FORTHWITH AT ANY RATE WITHIN A PERIOD OF 1 MONTH COST OF THIS PETITION.

¶25

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

¶26

ORDER

¶27

In this writ petition, the petitioners have sought for consideration of the representation dated 17.01.2023 (Annexure-E), interalia sought for direction to the respondents to transfer the revenue records in their favour in respect of the subject land.

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:37999 WP No. 8062 of 2023

¶29

I have heard Sri K.Satish, learned counsel

¶30

appearing for the petitioners and Sri C.N.Mahadeshwaran, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-Government.

¶31

Sri K. Satish, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Sub-Division, Bangalore, in Case No.R.A.(YLK) No.203/2021 decided on 14.12.2022, (Annexure-D), has allowed the appeal preferred by the petitioners and consequently directed the respondent No.2 herein, to transfer the khata and revenue entries in the name of the petitioners, jointly, in respect of the land in question by removing the word "Phada". Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners also submitted that, a rival claim was made against the subject land in W.P.No.5764 of 2023 before this court by one Sri Jayaraju against the petitioners, challenging the order dated 14.12.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore and said petition came to be dismissed on 18.04.2023 and in that

¶32

¶33

NC: 2023:KHC:37999 WP No. 8062 of 2023

¶34

view of the matter, he submitted that, there is no impendent for the respondent No.2 to consider the representation made by the petitioner. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court.

¶35

Per contra, Sri C.N.Mahadeshwaran, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-Government sought to justify the action of the respondent No.2 and sought to dismiss the petition.

¶36

Having taken note of the factual aspects on record that the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore, vide order dated 14.12.2022, (Annexure-D) allowed the appeal preferred by the petitioners herein and as such, directed the respondent No.2 herein to transfer the khata and revenue entries in the name of the petitioner. I am of the opinion that the respondent No.2 shall act accordingly. It is also made clear that, the writ petition filed by the rival claimants was dismissed by this court on 18.04.2023 in W.P. No.5764 of 2023. Therefore, the writ of mandamus is issued to the respondent No.2 to consider the

¶37

¶38

NC: 2023:KHC:37999 WP No. 8062 of 2023

¶39

representation dated 17.01.2023 made by the petitioners in accordance with law in the light of the observations made hereinabove within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶40

SD/JUDGE

¶41

SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45

Sri. N. Anjanappa, v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. N. Anjanappa, 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

K.N. Venugopal Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.K.v.Shivaram Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri G L Jeevan Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri K Veerabhadrachari Vs the State of Karnataka

N Vittal Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka

Maharajakumari Kamakshi Devi, Vs the State of Karnataka