Disposed

Sri N Ajay Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Nov 2024WP/1415/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the State to investigate allegations of forgery and malicious insertion in land records regarding the regularization of unauthorized cultivation. Pending the investigation, the petitioner was granted status-quo and ordered to be issued khatha if the claim is found genuine.

What did the court decide?

State directed to investigate land grant irregularities within 9 months; petitioner granted status-quo possession; directive to issue Khatha if claim is validated.

Sri N Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 1415 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. N.AJAY KUMAR, S/O LATE V.NARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/A KURUBARAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK - 564 114.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. T.N.VISWANATHA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, 1^ST FLOOR, DIST. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK 562 110.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 561 203.

¶15

THE TAHASILDAR, HOSKOTE TALUK, HOSKOTE, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT 564 114.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶18

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, RAJIVGANDHI GRAMEENA VASATHI NIGAMA NIYAMITHA, 9^TH FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, C & F BUILDING, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU 560 009.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT. B.P.RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SMT. SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE FOR R5)

¶21

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM BEARING NO.LND(Hos)CR/148/2018-19 DATED 08/03/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The case of the petitioner is that Sy.No.104 of Kurubarahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, consists of around 259 acres 22 guntas of land and much of it was sarkari gomala. Many people were cultivating portions of the said land and the petitioner herein was cultivating about 3 acres 30 guntas of land unauthorizedly.

¶26

He made necessary application before Committee for regularization of his unauthorized cultivation and that the

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶28

Committee resolved (vide Annexure-B to the writ petition) to grant the said 3 acres 30 guntas of land in favour of the petitioner and pursuant to the same, respondent No.4Tahasildar has issued the saguvali chit (vide Annexure-C to the writ petition). Thereafter, petitioner has made a request for issuance of khatha in respect of the property concerned in his name. It is the contention of the petitioner that in the meanwhile the State has reserved 8 acres of land for Ashraya Scheme in Sy.No.104 and has transferred the said 8 acres in the name of respondent No.5 and the said 8 acres consist of 3 acres 30 guntas of land granted in favour of the petitioner. It is further contended that thereafter, the State has not acted on the representation of the petitioner. For the said reasons, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with a prayer to set aside the grant of 8 acres land by the State in favour of respondent No.5 and also for a direction to the State to issue khatha in respect of 3 acres 30 guntas of land said to have been granted in favour of the petitioner.

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶30

Per contra, learned AGA submits that petitioner filed Form No.50 for regularization of his unauthorized cultivation before the Committee in respect of 3 acres 30 guntas of land, however, the same has not been considered by the Committee so far. But the entry recording the recommendation of the Committee has been tampered with by unknown persons and an insertion is made to the effect that petitioner has been granted the land concerned. It is submitted based on the culpable insertion made in the register it appears saguvali chit has been issued in favour of the petitioner, but she further states, that also needs to be investigated upon. Thus on the ground that petitioner's unauthorized occupation and cultivation of land was never regularized, it is prayed that writ petition be dismissed.

¶31

Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits that 8

¶32

acres allotted to respondent No.5 is different from 3 acres 30 guntas of land said to have been allotted in favour of

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶35

the petitioner. On the said ground, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶36

Thus, there are disputed question of facts in the present case, which cannot be decided by this Court in its excise of its power under Article 226 of Constitution of India. However, upon an enquiry into records, if it is found that there is an entry made regarding allotment of land in favour of petitioner in respect of 3 acres 30 guntas of land and saguvali chit has been issued in favour of petitioner genuinely and if there is an allotment to petitioner as contended by him, then in that event, the said land cannot be granted to respondent No.5 for Ashraya Scheme.

¶37

At this juncture, learned AGA upon instructions submits that the State is contemplating investigating the malpractices, forgery and fabrication of documents that might have taken place and they will take a decision in respect of the lands concerned after necessary investigation.

¶38

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶39

Under the given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to direct the State to make necessary investigation in time bound manner and if it is found that the grant made in favour of the petitioner is genuine, then in that event State is bound to issue necessary khatha to the petitioner and if it is found otherwise, the State is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in law against the concerned persons. Till that time, it would be advisable to maintain status-quo in respect of the property concerned and the petitioner should not be dispossessed of the land concerned. Hence, the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i) Respondent Nos.1 to 4 shall initiate necessary investigation including holding enquiry under Rule 108-K of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 in respect of land which is claimed by the petitioner and the said enquiry shall be completed within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this

¶42

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶43

order and the petitioner shall appear before respondent No.3 in this regard on 06.12.2024 at 3.00 p.m. without further notice;

¶44

ii) If upon necessary enquiry it is found that petitioner has been indeed granted the land as contended by him, then in that event, respondent No.4 shall forthwith issue khatha to the petitioner and if it is found otherwise, the State is at liberty to initiate necessary steps to recover the land concerned and also initiate criminal proceedings against the concerned; and the petitioner will have the liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law, if he so desires;

¶45

iii) Till a decision is taken by the State pursuant to the enquiry to be held, petitioner will not be restrained form possession of the property concerned;

¶46

iv) It is needless to state that respondent No.5 is having the liberty to exploit the land granted

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:45228 WP No. 1415 of 2024

¶49

to it in accordance with law except the land

¶50

belonging to the petitioner;

¶51

v) Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of .

¶52

In view of disposal of main petition, pending

¶53

interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶54

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶55

PGG

Sri N Ajay Kumar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri N Ajay Kumar 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

Smt. Byramma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri J v Venkatesh Vs the Chief Secretary

Sri. J. v. Venkatesh Vs the Commissioner

H M Manje Gowda Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Smt. Akshitha K a Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Ningamma Vs Assistant Commissioner