Allowed

Mallayyaswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Apr 2024WP/28724/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross writ petitions challenged the Land Tribunal's order rejecting a belated re-grant application for Inam land and resuming it to the Government. The court held the application had to be decided on merits and quashed the order, remitting the matter to the Land Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Orders at Annexures A and M quashed; matter remitted to Land Tribunal, Raichur for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

Mallayyaswamy Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.28724 OF 2016 (LR) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.201616 OF 2016 (LR)

¶8

IN W.P.NO.28724 OF 2016

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MALLAYYASWAMY S/O RACHOTAYYASWAMY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT THIMMAPUR, KADLUR POST, TALUK & DIST: RAICHUR – 584101.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: High Court Of Karnataka

¶13

(BY SRI RAVI B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M. S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560001.

¶16

THE LAND TRIBUNAL, RAICHUR REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, TALUK & DIST RAICHUR – 584101.

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶18

SRI SAAVIRADEVARA SAMSTHANA MATHA SUKSHETHRA BICHCHALI MATHAMARI, BICHCHALI, TALUK & DIST: RAICHUR - 584101 REP. BY ITS CHIEF MATHADHIPATHI PARAMAPUJUYA SRI GHANALINGA CHAKRAVARTHI SRI SHA. BRA. VEERATHAPSAVI SRI VEERABHADRA SHIVACHARYA MAHASWAMIGALU

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SRI SANDEEP PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING THE ORDER OF THE LAND TRIBUNAL, RAICHUR IN NO. SAM/KANDAYA/BHOOSU/65/83-84 DATED. 07.4.2016 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT THE LAND TRIBUNAL, RAICHUR TO GRANT OCCUPANCY RIGHT TO THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF LAND SY.NO.14 MEASURING 30-ACRES 37GUNTAS OF H.THIMMAPURA VILLAGE, TALUKA RAICHUR ETC.

¶22

IN W.P.NO.201616 OF 2016

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

SHRI SAVIRA DEVARA SAMSTHANA MATHA GABBUR HIREMATHA, BICCHALI, MATHAMARI, TQ: & DIST:RAICHUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MATHADIPADI SHA BRA VEERATAPASVI VEERABHADRA SHIVACHARYA MAHASWAMIGALU AGE:67 YEARS, OCC:MATHADIPATHI & AGRICULTURE, R/O BICCHALI, TQ : & DIST:RAICHUR

¶25

…PETITIONER

¶26

(BY SRI SANDEEP V. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶28

AND:

¶29

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.

¶30

THE LAND TRIBUNAL THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN RAICHUR TALUKA LAND TRIBUNAL TQ: & DIST:RAICHUR-584101

¶31

SHRI MALLAYYA S/O RACHOTAYYA AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O TIMMAPUR, KADLOOR POST, TQ: DIST:RAICHUR-584101.

¶32

…RESPONDENTS

¶33

(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SRI R.S. SIDHAPURKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶34

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER NO.REV/LR/65/83-84 DATD 7.4.2016 PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL RAICHUR BY WAY OF ISSUING WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN NATURE, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M ETC.

¶35

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

Heard learned counsel Sri Ravi B. Patil and learned

¶38

counsel Sri Sandeep Patil for the petitioners, learned High

¶39

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶40

Court Government Pleader Sri Veeranagouda Patil for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel Sri R.S.Sidhapurkar for respondent No.3 in W.P.No.201616/2016.

¶41

The writ petitions are filed with the following

¶42

prayers:

¶43

In W.P.No.28724/2016

¶44

“i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the order of the Land Tribunal, Raichur in No.SAM/KANDAYA/BHOOSU/65/83-84 dated. 07.4.2016 produced at Annexure-A.

¶45

ii) Direct the Land Tribunal, Raichur to grant occupancy right to the petitioner in respect of land Sy.No.14 measuring 30-acres 37-guntas of H.Thimmapura village, Taluka Raichur.

¶46

iii) Issue any other writ or direction to meet the ends of justice.”

¶47

In W.P.No.201616/2016

¶48

i) Allow the writ petition filed by the petitioner and quash the impugned order No.REV/LR/65/83-84 dated 7.4.2016 passed by the Land Tribunal Raichur

¶49

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶50

by way of issuing writ of certiorari in nature, produced at Annexure-M.

¶51

ii) It is most respectively prayed that the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue direction by way of writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to change the records of rights standing in the name of petitioner.

¶52

iii) It is most respectively prayed that, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any direction which are deemed fit in the circumstances of the facts of the case in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶53

The land in Survey No.14 of H. Thimmapura

¶54

Village, Raichur District measuring 30 acres 37 guntas was earlier belonging to Saavira Devara Samsthana Matha and one Sri Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy was the Pontiff of the said Matha. Said Matha has got the aforesaid land as Inam.

¶55

Sri Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy said to have died in the year 1971. A Will was executed by said Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy in favour one Sri Mallayyaswamy, which is an unregistered Will. Soon after the

¶56

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶57

Inam Abolition Act came into force, present petitioner was required to file an application for re-grant. However, he did not do so. Later on belatedly he filed an application for re-grant in the year 30.06.1983.

¶58

The writ petitioner in W.P. No.201616/2016 represented by Sri Veeratapasvi Veerabhadra Shivacharya Mahaswamigalu objected for grant of the land in favour of Mallayyaswamy. The Land Tribunal adjudicated the matter and granted the order in favour of Mallayyaswamy. The same was challenged before this Court in this Writ Petition. Sri Veeratapasvi Veerabhadra Shivacharya Mahaswamigalu succeeded in the writ petition by getting the order of the Land Tribunal annulled. Later the matter was taken up in writ appeal by Mallayyaswamy and the Division Bench of this Court allowed the writ appeal and remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

¶59

After the matter was remanded to the Land Tribunal, the Land Tribunal recorded a categorical findings that Sri Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy, who was the original Mathadhipathi of Saavira Devara Samthana Matha did not file

¶60

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶61

application for re-grant of the land soon after the Inam Abolition Act came into force and rejected the belated application filed by Sri Mallayyaswamy and resumed the land to the Government. The said order of the Land Tribunal is challenged by both Sri Mallayyaswamy as well as Sri Veeratapasvi Veerabhadra Shivacharya Mahaswamigalu in their respective two writ petitions.

¶62

Sri Ravi B. Patil and Sri Sandeep V. Patil, learned counsels respectively appearing for the writ petitioners submit that the order of the Land Tribunal is incorrect. They also submit that they would now like to enter into a compromise and suitable orders be passed by setting aside the order of the Land Tribunal.

¶63

Per contra, Veernagouda Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri R.S. Sidhapurkar, learned counsel for respondent No.3, however support the impugned order.

¶64

Learned High Court Government Pleader contended

¶65

that Sri Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy, who was the

¶66

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶67

original Pontiff of Shree Savira Devara Samsthana Matha has not filed application for re-grant and therefore, resumption of land to the Government is just and proper.

¶68

Sri R.S. Siddapurkar, contended that after the land was resumed to the Government, the 3^rd respondent in WP No.201616/2016 he has been allotted the said land by the Government, therefore, his interest has now crept in the land, therefore, the order passed by the Land Tribunal is just and proper.

¶69

Having heard the parties in detail, this Court perused the material meticulously.

¶70

On such perusal of the material on records, it is crystal clear that Sri Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy, who was original Pointiff of Shree Savira Devara Samsthana Matha, said to have died in the year 1971. Therefore, the finding recorded by the Land Tribunal that no application was filed by Sri Basalingaswamy Gurulingaswamy for re-grant cannot be countenanced in law.

¶71

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶72

Whether at all Sri Mallayya Swamy is the successor, who is entitled to file the application for re-grant, especially having regard to the internal dispute between Sri Veeratapasvi Veerabhadra Shivacharya Mahaswamigalu and Mallayya Swamy, the Tribunal has taken a peculiar view in resuming the land to the Government. Such a course adopted by the Land Tribunal cannot be countenanced in law inasmuch as the regrant application filed by Sri Mallayya Swamy ought to have been decided on merits in accordance with law especially in view of the objections raised by Sri Veeratapasvi Veerabhandra Shivacharya Mahaswamigalu who also claims to be as Peetadhipathi of Savira Devara Sanstahana Matha.

¶73

At any rate, order of resumption of the land to the Government without recording a findings on the application for re-grant filed by Sri Mallayya Swamy has thus resulted in miscarriage of justice calling for interference by this Court in this writ petition.

¶74

15. Accordingly, the following:

¶75

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:3153 WP No. 28724 of 2016 C/W WP No. 201616 of 2016

¶76

ORDER

¶77

i. The writ petitions are allowed.

¶78

ii. The orders at Annexures – A and M stand quashed.

¶79

iii. Matter is remitted to the Land Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

¶80

Sd/JUDGE

¶81

SRT/SBS CT:SI List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0

Mallayyaswamy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mallayyaswamy 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

Lakma Since Deceased by Lrs Vs the State of Karnataka

Laxminarayan Malu Since by Lrs Vs Ningappa Naduvinamani Since by Lrs

Veeranna S/O Chandramappa Nagade and Ors. Vs the Prl. Secretary and Ors.

Smt.Rajalaxmi Vs Smt. Chinnamma

Ashok Naika @ Ganesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Pavan Kumar Vs State of Karnataka