Dismissed

H M Manje Gowda v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Karnataka HC8 Nov 2024WP/19464/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claimed rehabilitation land under the Hemavathi Reservoir Project was erroneously granted to respondents. The court found an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act before the Assistant Commissioner and dismissed the writ petition with liberty to appeal, condoning time spent before this Court.

What the court decided

AI extract

H M Manje Gowda Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:45247 WP No. 19464 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.19464 OF 2019 (KLR-LG)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

H.M. MANJE GOWDA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR

¶8

SMT. B.A. VANAJAKSHI D/O LATE H.M. MANJE GOWDA W/O B.G. ANANDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS DODDABILAHA VILLAGE SHANIVARA SANTHE HOBLI SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 231.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

(BY SRI M.J. ALVA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT-1 HASANA DISTRICT, HASANA.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI.

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:45247 WP No. 19464 of 2019

¶17

DEPT. OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

¶18

THE TAHSILDAR SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 231.

¶19

HARIJANA MALLAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LR'S

¶20

a) SMT. BASAMMA W/O LATE HARIJANA MALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

¶21

b) RAJASHEKARA S/O LATE HARIJANA MALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

¶22

c) SMT. KAMALA D/O LATE HARIJANA MALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶23

ALL ARE HAVING COMMON ADDRESS AT DODDABILAHA VILLAGE BEMBALUR POST, KODLIPET HOBLI SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 231.

¶24

HARIJANA DEVAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRs

¶25

a) SMT. RAJAMMA W/O LATE HARIJANA DEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶26

b) BOPAIAH S/O LATE HARIJANA DEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶27

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45247 WP No. 19464 of 2019

¶29

DODDABILAHA VILLAGE BEMBALURU POST, KODLIPET HOBLI SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 231.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI HARISH A.S., AGA FOR R.1 TO R.4; SRI ABHINAV R., ADVOCATE FOR R.5 & R.6; R.5(a) TO R.5(c), R.6(a) AND R.6(b) : SERVED)

¶32

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER NO.LND/SC/172/80.81 DATED 18.11.1980 PASSED BY THE TAHSILDAR, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT/RESPONDENT NO.4 IN SR FORM 3, WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, ETC.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

The case of the petitioner is that he was granted writ petition schedule property as a part of the rehabilitation package towards his land which got sub-merged in the Hemavathi Reservoir Project. It is his contention that the writ petition schedule property has been erroneously granted by respondent No.4 in favour of respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:45247 WP No. 19464 of 2019

¶39

2. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing

¶40

for respondent Nos.1 to 4 upon instructions submits that what has been granted to the petitioner is the land in Sy.No.51/3 of Dodda Belaha Village, Bembalur Post, Kodlipet Hobli, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District and what has been now granted in favour of respondent Nos.5 and 6 are in Sy.No.51/38-39 and they are not the same lands.

¶41

However, the said statement of learned AGA is disputed by the petitioner and he contends that Sy.No.51/3 is sub-divided and now a portion of Sy.No.51/3 has been re-assigned and numbered as Sy.Nos.51/38 and 51/39.

¶42

Be that as it may, the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and he can challenge the impugned order before the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2024:KHC:45247 WP No. 19464 of 2019

¶45

As the petitioner has got an alternative and efficacious remedy, the writ petition is hereby dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate Authority in the manner known to law and in case, such an appeal is filed, the time spent by the petitioner before this

¶46

Court pursuing the instant writ petition shall be condoned.

¶47

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶48

VMB

¶49

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

H M Manje Gowda v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

H M Manje Gowda v. the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

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

Sri N Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Akshitha K a Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Ningamma Vs Assistant Commissioner