Allowed

Smt. Marakka v. the State Government

Karnataka HC3 Sept 2024WP/18451/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought mutation of inheritance entries in revenue records for land granted to their father under Section 77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, based on pending representations. The High Court held that revenue authorities are bound to examine such representations and issued mandamus.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus: respondents No.2 to 4 directed to consider petitioners' representations dated 02.11.2023 and 06.01.2024 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within four months.

Smt. Marakka Vs the State Government — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:35959 WP No. 18451 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 18451 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. MARAKKA, W/O LATE YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT KODIYALA, KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562 109.

¶8

SMT. SUSHEELAMMA, D/OLATE YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT KODIYALA, KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562 109.

¶9

Digitally signed by YAMUNA K L Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

SRI. NAGARAJU, S/O LATE YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562 109.

¶11

SRI. K.Y. RAVI, S/O LATE YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562 109.

¶12

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:35959 WP No. 18451 of 2024

¶13

SRI. NARAYANA, S/O LATE YELLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562 109.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. SURESHA C, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE GOVERNMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA - 562 109.

¶19

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA - 562 109.

¶20

THE TAHASILDAR, RAMANAGARA - 562 109.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 06/01/2024 AND 02/11/2023 ANNEXURE-G, G1 AND G2 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AND THEREBY ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONERS IN THE REVENUE RECORDS IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING SY. NO. 184/2 MEASURING 1 ACRE 32

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:35959 WP No. 18451 of 2024

¶25

GUNTAS OF KODIYALA KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND TO MAKE NECESSARY ENTRIES IN THE REVENUE RECORDS.

¶26

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

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Learned AGA accepts notice for the respondentsState.

¶29

The captioned petition is filed seeking mandamus against respondents No.2 to 4 to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners on 06.01.2024 and 02.11.2023 as per Annexure-G, G1 and G2 and mutate the name of the petitioners by way of inheritance in respect of petition land bearing Sy.No.184/2 measuring 1 acre 32 guntas of Kodiyala Karenahalli village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk.

¶30

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned AGA appearing for the

¶31

respondents-State.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:35959 WP No. 18451 of 2024

¶34

The petitioners' father, Yellappa, claimed to be a tenant of the petition land. In view of the amendment to the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short, 'Act') and incorporation of Section 77A to the Act, the petitioners' father filed Form No.7A seeking grant of the land in question on the premises that he was a lawful tenant as on appointed date. The Assistant Commissioner, after due enquiry, passed an order on 20.11.2004 and has granted the land in question; the same is evidenced at Annexure-B and C. The petitioners contend that pursuant to grant, Yellappa's name was not mutated to the revenue records.

¶35

Be that as it may. The representations submitted by the petitioners placing reliance on the grant order passed under Section 77A of the Act. The petitioners are asserting that their ancestor Yellappa acquired right pursuant to grant order passed by respondent No.3/Assistant Commissioner. If representations are submitted, the revenue authorities are bound to examine the representations and pass appropriate orders. These

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:35959 WP No. 18451 of 2024

¶37

representations are dated 02.11.2023 and 06.01.2024.

¶38

Since there is inaction on the part of respondents, this is a

¶39

fit case where a mandamus lies.

¶40

For the forgoing reasons, this Court passes the

¶41

following;

¶42

ORDER

¶43

i. The writ petition is allowed;

¶44

ii. Respondents No.2 to 4 are hereby directed to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders;

¶45

iii. This exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶46

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶47

HDK

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10 CT: BHK

Smt. Marakka v. the State Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Marakka v. the State Government

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

Sri H Venkatesh Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Manjunatha Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. K K Halamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Vedavathi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Yesudas D Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Girish Vs State of Karnataka