Writ petition challenging an eviction notice issued by the Tahasildar for land granted to the petitioner's father. The court found the notice lacked a proper enquiry and violated natural justice, treated it as a show-cause notice, allowed objections, and barred precipitative action until orders after enquiry.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:37103 WP No. 24798 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 24798 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SANDESH V.P, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O PARVATHEGOWDA V.S, VALAGERAHALLI, HALASUMANE, CHICKMAGALUR TALUK, CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 133.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by YAMUNA K L Location: High Court of Karnataka
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HARISHA A.S, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE/ORDER DATED 22/08/2024 IN NO. VASTARE TT(MI)/23-24 (E477077) ISSUED BY THE TAHSHILDAR, CHICKMAGALUR TALUK I.E. R2 HEREIN IN SO FAR AS THE LAND BEARING SY. NO.46 MEASURING 0.35 GUNTAS OF
HALASUMANE VILLAGE, VASTARE HOBLI, CHICKMAGALUR TALUK (SL.NO.12 AT ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
The captioned writ petition is filed challenging the impugned eviction notice dated 22.08.2024 issued by respondent No.2 – Tahasildar as per Annexure-A.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned AGA appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
3. The petitioner contends that his father being a landless person applied for grant of land in Sy. No.46 of Halasumane Village, Vastare Hobli, Chikkamagaluru Taluk to an extent of 5 guntas. The petitioner contends that the Tahasildar of Chikkamangaluru has granted 5 guntas of land to the petitioner's father. In a family partition between the petitioner and his brothers, the petition land
fallen to the share of the petitioner under partition deed dated 30.07.1999 vide Annexure-B.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner while reiterating the grounds urged in the captioned writ petition would point out that 5 guntas of land is A-Kharab land and therefore, respondent No.2 – Tahasildar lacks jurisdiction to summarily evict the petitioner by exercising power under Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.
5. Having reviewed the records, it is clearly evident that the petitioner’s father was granted 5 guntas in Sy. No.46. The petitioner asserts that kharab land appears to be A-kharab land, while learned AGA asserts that it is a B- kharab land. The impugned eviction notice, prima-facie, is not preceded by an enquiry though it is in the form of show cause notice. Under the impugned eviction notice, respondent No.2 – Tahasildar has resolved summarily to evict the petitioner on the premise that he has unauthorisedly occupied the petition land.
6. The petitioner is asserting right based on the grant certificate and therefore, is entitled to substantiate that it is A-kharab land. Since the impugned notice is not preceded by proper enquiry and the same is passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, the impugned eviction notice has to be treated as a showcause notice. The petitioner deserves an opportunity to contest this eviction notice. Till respondent No.2 – Tahasildar decides and examine the petitioner’s objection and pass appropriate orders after holding an enquiry, no precipitative action shall be taken. Hence, this court proceeds to pass the following;
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned eviction notice dated 22.08.2024 shall be treated as a show-cause notice.
(iii) The petitioner shall tender his objection within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of order copy.
(iv) Respondent No.2 – Tahasildar shall look into the objection and after hearing the petitioner, shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
(v) Till then, respondent No.2 - Tahasildar shall not take any precipitative action.
Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30 CT: BHK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tahasildar could summarily evict the petitioner from A-kharab land granted to his father without holding an enquiry under Section 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sandesh V.P.
The State of Karnataka, represented by Principal Secretary, Revenue Department
Tahashildar, Chickmagalur Taluk
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
