Appeal by writ petitioners seeking regularisation of unauthorised cultivation in Sy.No.259, Bettahalasuru Village. The Division Bench upheld the Single Judge's order applying the two-hectare ceiling under Section 94A and rejecting a Committee member's claim, and dismissed the appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.A. No.1234/2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. P.S. DINESH KUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
WRIT APPEAL NO.1234 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
B.M. RENUKA PRASAD S/O LATE B.C. MALLANNA SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES
B.C. RAJANNA
S/O LATE BYRAPPA @ CHIKKA BYRAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES
W.A. No.1234/2022
2(BY SHRI. A.V. GANGADHARAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
W.A. No.1234/2022
3
YALAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560 064
4 . TAHSILDAR YALAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560 064 …RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. SUDEV HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2022 PASSED IN WP NO.7733/2021 AND BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR
THIS WRIT APPEAL, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 04.01.2024 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
This intra-court appeal by the unsuccessful writ petitioners is directed against the order dated October 20, 2022 in W.P.No. 7733/2021 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge.
W.A. No.1234/2022
4
1 ‘the Committee’ for short
W.A. No.1234/2022
5
passed by the learned Single Judge, the petitioners have filed the instant appeal.
appellants/petitioners submitted that the Learned Single Judge has erred in rejecting the claim of the first petitioner and reducing the extent of land of the second petitioner.
“Whether the impugned order requires any interference?
filed an application on 27.05.1991 for regularization of unauthorized occupation before the Committee. The learned Single Judge has rejected the claim of first petitioner and
W.A. No.1234/2022
6
directed to consider the claim of second and third petitioners
subject to certain conditions.
Land Revenue Act, 1964 reads thus:
Nothing in section 94 shall prevent the committee constituted under sub-section (1), [or additional committee constituted under sub-section (2A)] , but subject to such rules as may be prescribed, if any, to grant to the person liable to be evicted under that section, the land which he had unauthorisedly occupied prior to the 6 [first day of January, 2005](hereinafter referred to as the said date) or any portion thereof, if he satisfies the prescribed conditions (including the extent of the land held and unauthorisedly occupied by him) and makes 6 [within a period of one year from the date of commencement of the Karnataka Land Revenue (Amendment) Act, 2018] (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act), an application for such grant in such form along with such fees as may be prescribed and on payment of the amount payable under sub-section (5): Provided that the land so granted together with the land already held by such person, shall not exceed two hectares of ‘D’ class of land or its equivalent thereto:
(Emphasis supplied)
of an applicant for regularisation of his unathorised occupation shall not exceed two hectares.
W.A. No.1234/2022
7
W.A. No.1234/2022
8
opinion that this appeal is devoid of merits and accordingly,
dismissed .
No costs.
Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/JUDGE
SPS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Single Judge's order on regularisation of unauthorised occupation under Section 94A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act required interference?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.M. Renuka Prasad since dead by legal representatives
B.C. Rajanna since dead by legal representatives
State of Karnataka represented by Principal Secretary to Government and Commissioner Revenue Department
Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Rural District
Committee for Regularisation of Unauthorised Occupation
Tahsildar Yalahanka Taluk
P.S. Dinesh Kumar
T.G. Shivashankare Gowda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court