Allowed

Mr. Ramanatha Shetty v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Sept 2024WP/14790/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a condition of non-alienation imposed on a cashew cultivation grant. Relying on a prior judgment in WP No.27790/2016, the Court held that the Deputy Commissioner could not invoke Rule 9 to impose such conditions when granting permanent ownership after temporary leases. The illegal condition was quashed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed, Clause 4 of the impugned conditions was declared illegal, and set aside.

Mr. Ramanatha Shetty Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:37358 WP No. 14790 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 14790 OF 2024 (KLR-LG)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. RAMANATHA SHETTY S/O. KRISHNA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KAKKEMAJALU HOUSE, DERALAKATTE POST, MANGALURU-575018.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M S.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, DISTRICT COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, STATE BANK ROAD, MANGALURU-575001.

¶15

THE TAHASILDAR OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR, ULLALA TALUK

¶16

DASHINA KANNADA DISTRICT- 574199.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.HARSHA A.S., AGA)

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:37358 WP No. 14790 of 2024

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CONDITION NO. 2 IMPOSED BY THE R2 IN THE ORDER OF GRANT DATED 17/09/2022 BEARING NO. LND (3) CR/04/201718/5750/B2 AND THE CONDITION NO. 7 AND CONDITION NO. 4 ON THE SECOND PAGE IN THE GRANT CERTIFICATE BEARING NO. LND/GERU LEASE/CR/04/2017-18-SAGUVALI CHIT NO. 41/2022-23 DATED 17/09/2022 ISSUED BY R3 VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND L.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is aggrieved by a portion of the impugned grant order dated 17.09.2022 viz., Clause 2 and Grant Certificate dated 17.09.2022 viz., Clause 4 wherein a condition has been imposed that the petitioner/grantee shall not alienate the land for a period of twenty-five years.

¶24

The undisputed facts are that Sri K Mundappa shetty applied for grant of land in Sy.No.1-1B, measuring 5 acres situated at Konaje Village, Mangaluru Taluk, for the purpose of cashew cultivation. The Tahsildar, Mangaluru passed orders on 02.01.1962 in terms of

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:37358 WP No. 14790 of 2024

¶26

Annexure-A granting the land temporarily in terms of the provisions contained in the South Kanara District Lease of

¶27

Lands for Cashew Cultivation Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules, 1957, for short). Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of Rule 3(i) of the Rules, 1957, land shall be granted on thirty years lease with option to the lessee for its renewal on the expiry of the thirty years period in respect of those lessees who fulfil the terms and conditions of the grant, satisfactorily. The lessee shall also be given the option to acquire permanent ownership of the land on the expiry of thirty years on payment of the value of the land fixed at the time of the grant itself.

¶28

Having regard to the said provision, though the

¶29

grantee/petitioner's grandfather gave several

¶30

representations after the expiry of the period of thirty years, seeking permanent grant, but no orders were passed. After the death of the petitioner's grandfather, the petitioner/legal heir of the grantee gave a representation

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:37358 WP No. 14790 of 2024

¶33

seeking grant on permanent ownership basis. In response to the request, the second respondent-Deputy Commissioner rejected such representation by endorsement dated 18.04.2015 which was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in WP No.30532/2015. This Court by order dated 19.01.2017 allowed the petition directing the second respondent to collect the price at the rate of 300 times of the land revenue payable per acre that was prevailing as on the date of grant and issue grant certificate in favour of the petitioner within three months

¶34

from the date of receipt of such order. The second respondent, in compliance with the order of this Court in WP No.30532/2015 passed a grant order imposing condition No.2 that the land shall not be alienated for a period of 25 years and shall be used only for growing cashew plants and not for any other purposes and the third respondent issued grant certificate imposing condition No.7 that land shall not be alienated for period of 25 years and condition No.4 at page No.2 that the land shall not be used for non-agricultural purposes for 25

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:37358 WP No. 14790 of 2024

¶37

years by order dated 17.09.2022. The Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order dated 17.09.2022 at Annexure-K, directing conferment of permanent ownership in the name of the petitioner herein. However, the Deputy Commissioner has imposed a condition of non-alienation for a period of twenty-five years in Clause-4 of the impugned order.

¶38

The learned counsel for the parties submit that the condition of non-alienation imposed is squarely covered by the Order of this Court dated 27.02.2024 in W.P. No.27790/2016 and hence the caption petition may also be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.

¶39

"6. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate and on perusing the petition papers, this Court finds that even if Rule 9 of the Rules, 1969 stood amended w.e.f., from 25.04.2005, nevertheless, the conferment of permanent grant in terms of sub-rule (1) of Rule 23 where earlier temporary leases were granted, Rule 9 of the Rules, 1969, cannot be read into Rule 23. Rule 9 pertains to the grants made

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:37358 WP No. 14790 of 2024

¶42

under the provisions of the Rules, 1969. A separate provision has been made in Rule 23 in respect of the temporary lease granted prior to the commencement of the Rules, 1969. A bare reading of the said provision would make it clear that after expiry of the period and having regard to the fact that all the other conditions have been fulfilled by the grantee, the Deputy Commissioner is empowered to fix the price and grant the land permanently. The Deputy Commissioner is therefore required to grant the land in accordance with the Rules under which the lands were earlier leased. Therefore, it would be impermissible for the Deputy Commissioner to invoke Rule 9 of the Rules, 1969, to once again impose a condition of non-alienation for twenty-five years in terms of Rule 9.

¶43

7. For the forgoing reasons, this Court is satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for interference. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed , while declaring that Clause 4 of the conditions imposed in the impugned order dated 21.11.2013 is illegal and therefore, the same is quashed and set aside."

¶44