Allowed

Smt. Vedavathi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Sept 2024WP/23705/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India concerning non-mutation of land grant entries. The Court found conscious laxness by revenue authorities in not considering a representation dated 24.09.2023 and directed the Tahasildar to reflect the existing entries. The petition was allowed and the exercise was mandated to be completed within two months.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Respondent No. 4 directed to consider representation dated 24.09.2023 regarding mutation of entries within two months.

Smt. Vedavathi Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:35897 WP No. 23705 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. 23705 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. VEDAVATHI W/O NAGESH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS AGRICULTURIST GUDDADABEERANAHALLI VILLAGE LAKKAVALLI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU-577 228.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. H. MALATESH, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-02.

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT CHIKMAGALURU-577 101.

¶14

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:35897 WP No. 23705 of 2024

¶17

4. THE TAHASILDAR TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA)

¶20

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-4 AND THE CONCERNED REVENUE AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION DTD. 24.09.2023 PRODUCED AS ANNX-D AND ETC.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Learned AGA is directed to accept notice for the respondents.

¶25

The petitioner was granted the petition land

¶26

vide grant order dated 14.04.1998. Pursuant to grant, the petitioner's name was duly mutated to the RTC. However, in 2001-02, the manual entries were discontinued and are not carried forward to the computerized records maintained by the revenue authorities. This compelled the petitioner to submit a representation requesting the

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:35897 WP No. 23705 of 2024

¶28

respondent authorities to reflect the entries as they existed in manual RTC.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents-State.

¶30

The petitioner, on account of conscious laxness on the part of respondents, has submitted the representation on 24.09.2023 vide Annexure-D. There is conscious laxness on the part of respondents in not considering the representation. If the grant made in favour

¶31

of the petitioner was intact and the grantee's name was mutated and reflected in the ownership column till 200102, the petitioner has a legal right to seek a direction at the hands of this Court. Correspondingly, respondent No.4 is obligated to consider representation and pass appropriate orders.

¶32

There being a conscious laxness on the part of respondent No.4, this Court passes the following:

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:35897 WP No. 23705 of 2024

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i. The writ petition is allowed;

¶37

ii. Respondent No.4 is hereby directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.09.2023 vide Annexure-D in accordance with law by taking cognizance of the grant order and the existing entries till 2001-02 in the manual RTC and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; iii. This exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order;

¶38

iv. Pending I.As.', if any, do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of accordingly.

¶39

SD/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶40

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

¶41

Smt. Vedavathi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vedavathi v. 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

Sri H Venkatesh Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Manjunatha Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. K K Halamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Yesudas D Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Girish Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Hanumanth Bovi Vs State of Karnataka