Disposed

Sri. Yellappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Jun 2023WP/9173/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution sought a direction to conclude proceedings in a land grant matter pending for over 15 years. The court dispensed with notices to additional respondents and directed the Tahsildar to conclude the enquiry within six months.

What did the court decide?

Notice to respondents 4 to 10 dispensed; respondent 3 directed to conclude proceedings at Annexure-E within six months.

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

¶1

1 - WP No. 9173 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.9173 OF 2023 (KVOA)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. YELLAPPA, S/O. LATE SRI. PUTTAYELLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

¶8

SRI. DASAPPA, S/O. LATE SRI. CHIKKAYELLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶9

SRI. VENKATAPPA S/O. SMT. YELLAMMA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

¶10

PETITIONERS 1 to 3 ARE RESIDENTS OF VOKKODI VILLAGE, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 107.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

[BY SRI. K. ABHINAV ANAND, ADVOCATE (PH)]

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT., GURURAJ D (LAND GRANTS) REVENUE DEPARTMENT, Location: High M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TUMKUR SUB-DIVISION, TUMKUR-572 107.

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR-572 107.

¶17

SMT. LAKSHAMAMMA SINCE DECEASED REP. BY HER LR AND ONLY SON SRI. V. N. GANGAIAH, SRI. V. N. GANGAIAH, ALSO DEAD BY HIS LRS.,

¶18

¶19

WP No. 9173 of 2023

¶20

SRI. V.N. NATARAJ, S/O. LATE SRI. V.N. GANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶21

SRI. NAGARAJ, S/O. LATE SRI. V. N. GANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶22

SRI. V.N. PRAKASH, S/O. LATE SRI. V.N. GANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,

¶23

SMT. V.N. UMADEVI, D/O. LATE SRI. V.N. GANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

¶24

SMT. V.N. MANJULA, D/O. LATE SRI. V.N. GANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,

¶25

SRI. PARASHURAM, S/O. SRI. DODDAYELLAIAH, SINCE DECEASED REPTD. BY HIS LRS.

¶26

SRI. JAGADEESH, S/O. LATE SRI. PARASHURAM, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶27

SRI. SHEKAR, S/O. LATE SRI. PARASHURAM, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶28

RESPONDENTS 4 TO 10 ARE RESIDENTS OF VOKKODI VILLAGE, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 107.

¶29

…RESPONDENTS

¶30

[BY SRI. BHOJEGOWDA T. KOLLER, AGA., R1 TO R3 (PH)]

¶31

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE 3^RD RESPONDENT TO HOLD ENQUIRY BY MAKING ALL THE HAKDARS OF THE KOLAKARIKE FAMILY AS RESPONDENTS AND TO REGRANT THE KOLAKARIKE SERVICE INAM LANDS IN SY.NOS.62, 92 AND 115 OF VOKKODI VILLAGE, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK AND DISTRICT, IN FAVOUR OF THE HAKDARS OF KOLAKARIKE FAMILY OF VOKKODI VILLAGE VIDE ANNEXURE-E.

¶32

¶33

WP No. 9173 of 2023

¶34

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

¶35

ORDER

¶36

Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that prayer in writ petition is confined only to direction to respondent no.3 for earlier conclusion of proceedings in Annexure-E. Since same is remained pending for over a period of 15 years after being remanded as per order dated 02.02.2008 passed by I Additional Fast Track Court, Tumkur in MA(VOA).no.12/2002 at Annexure-D.

¶37

In view of said prayer, issuance of notice to respondents no.4 to 10 would become unnecessary. Notice to respondents no.4 to 10 is dispensed with.

¶38

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents no.1 to 3.

¶39

Since only relief is sought for mandamus directing respondent no.3 to conclude enquiry at Annexure-E, which admittedly pending for more than 15 years, it would be appropriate to dispose of writ petition by directing respondent no.3 to conclude proceedings at Annexure-E, in accordance with law, as early as possible, in any case, within an outer limit

¶40

¶41

WP No. 9173 of 2023

¶42

of six months from date of receipt of certified copy of this

¶43

order.

¶44

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

GRD

Sri. Yellappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Yellappa 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

M/S Anna Maria Plantations Vs Range Forest Officer

Sri C Manjunatha, Vs Sri C v Ashwatha

Ramachandregowda @ Chandregowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. S. K. Ramareddy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Ravindra Adyanthaya Vs Mrs. Jayanthi Adyanthaya

Smt. Shanthi Subramaniam Vs the Regional Transport Authority