Allowed

Sri. Venkatachalaiah v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Sept 2024WP/18626/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner sought issuance of a saguvali chit for regularised unauthorized occupation despite a Bagar Hukum Committee recommendation and an Official Memorandum issued by the Tahasildar. The court found discrimination against similarly placed applicants who received chits and directed the Tahasildar to act on the memorandum within three months.

What did the court decide?

Tahasildar directed to take cognizance of OM No.LND:SR:162:99-2000 dated 05.05.2006 (Annexure-B) and pass appropriate orders, noting chits given to similarly placed applicants, within three months.

Sri. Venkatachalaiah Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:36964 WP No. 18626 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.18626 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.VENKATACHALAIAH S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESIDING AT BANASAVADI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 130

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. OMKARA MURTHY G, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BEERASANDRA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN - 562 110

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:36964 WP No. 18626 of 2024

¶17

THE TAHASILDAR NELAMANGALA TALUK NELAMANGALA PIN - 562 123

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI.HARISHA A.S, AGA)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE SAGUVALI CHIT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY SY NO.77 MEASURING 1-00 ACRE 0-25 GUNTAS SITUATED AT BANASAVADI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DIST AS PER THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM NO.LND SR 162 99-2000 DTD 5.05.2006 AS ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

¶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

Learned AGA is directed to accept notice for respondents.

¶24

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by inaction of respondent No.3 – Tahasildar in not issuing saguvali chit

¶25

pursuant to the recommendation made by the Bagar Hukum Committee vide order dated 09.06.2003.

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:36964 WP No. 18626 of 2024

¶28

3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned AGA.

¶29

4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of respondent No.3 - Tahasildar in not issuing Saguvali Chit even though there is a recommendation made by the Bagar Hukum Committee recommending to regularize the petitioner’s unauthorized occupation over the petition land.

¶30

5. Section 108 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1966 empowers the Committee to hold an enquiry and determine whether applicant is entitled to seek regularization of unauthorized occupation. In the case on hand, it is not in dispute that Bagar Hukum Committee has already recommended to regularize petitioner’s unauthorized occupation. It is not in dispute that respondent No.3 is in receipt of such recommendation. Once there is a recommendation by the Committee under Section 108D of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1966, respondent No.3 - Tahasildar is bound to examine the

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:36964 WP No. 18626 of 2024

¶33

recommendation and pass appropriate orders subject to the satisfaction of respondent No.3 - Tahasildar either to issue certificate of Grant or Saguvali Chit in Form No.7 as contemplated under the Karnataka Land Grants Rules, 1969 or dismiss the application. In the case on hand, respondent No.3 – Tahasildar has acted on the recommendation and has issued Official Memorandum bearing No.LND/SR 162/99-2000 dated 05.05.2006, which is evidenced at Annexure-B. Having issued Official Memorandum, respondent No.3 - Tahasildar has declined

¶34

to issue Saguvali Chit and therefore, the petitioner is compelled to knock the doors of this Court.

¶35

6. Learned AGA citing Notification issued by the State would point out that the petition land falls within the distance of 18 kilometer from BBMP jurisdiction. Therefore, learned AGA, on instructions, submits that dehors the recommendation made by the Committee and Official Memorandum issued by the Tahasilar, no saguvali chit can be issued to the petitioner.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:36964 WP No. 18626 of 2024

¶38

7. It is interesting to note that similarly placed applicants, whose names were found in the same list as the petitioner, the Tahasildar has issued a Saguvali Chit and the applicants names were duly mutated to the RTC. However, the action of respondents is clearly a case of discrimination insofar as petitioner is concerned. Post recommendation, respondent No.3 – Tahasildar acting under Section 108D has already issued Official Memorandum, which is evidenced at Annexure-B. A legal right has accrued to the petitioner pursuant to the recommendation made by the Committee followed by the Official Memorandum issued by respondent No.3 – Tahasildar. Therefore, this is a fit case where mandamus lies. Respondent No.3 is obligated to consider the petitioner’s representation and pass appropriate orders. Since there is a clear inaction on the part of respondent No.3 – Tahasildar, this is a fit case where mandamus lies.

¶39

8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following;

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:36964 WP No. 18626 of 2024

¶42

ORDER

¶43

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶44

(ii) Respondent No.3 – Tahasildar is hereby directed to take cognizance of the Official Memorandum No.LND:SR: 162:99-2000 dated 05.05.2006 as per Annexure-B and pass appropriate orders.

¶45

(iii) Respondent No.3 – Tahasildar shall take cognizance of the observations made by this Court supra and shall also take note of Saguvali Chit issued to the similarly placed applicants, which is evidenced at Annexure-H.

¶46

(iv) This exercise shall be accomplished within a period of three months.

¶47

SD/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶48

NBM

¶49

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Sri. Venkatachalaiah v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Venkatachalaiah 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

Anitha R Prabhu Vs the State of Karnataka

V S Thimmegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Indresh H N Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. G. Sheela Vs the Govt of Karnataka

Sri C Chethan Kumar Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt Lakshmamma Vs State of Karnataka