Karnataka High Court
Sri K R Krishna Murthy vs State Of Karnataka on 14 September, 2022
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
WP No. 18284 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 18284 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI K R KRISHNA MURTHY
SON OF LATE RANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO 129, MIG KHB COLONY,
1ST STAGE, BANGALORE - 560079
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P M., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
JUANITA THEJESWINI AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001
2. THE TAHSILDAR
MAGADI TALUK, MAGADI
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562120
3. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
KALYA GRAM PANCHAYATHI
KALYA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI
MAGADI TALUK
RAMANGARA DISTRICT - 562120
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR A PATIL, AGA)
-2-
WP No. 18284 of 2022
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 23.08.2022 PASSED VIDE REFERENCE
NO.NCR.CR/398/2021-22 AND NCR.CR/199/2021-22 BY THE
R2 AS PER ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondents No.1 and 2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since it was mentioned in the notice dated 30.05.2022 at Annexure-D at reference No.1 that there was a communication made by the Panchayat Development Officer of Kalya Gram Panchayat dated 01.10.2021, the Panchayat Development Officer has been impleaded as respondent No.3. Further even in the impugned order at reference No.1 the name of the Panchayath Development Officer and the communication dated 01.10.2021 is shown. However, no relief is claimed against the 3rd -3- WP No. 18284 of 2022 respondent Panchayat Development Officer or the Gram Panchayat.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased the land in question measuring 5 acres 29 guntas in Sy.No.211 of Kalya Village, Kasaba Hobli, Magadi Taluk, under a registered sale deed dated 13.10.1993. If is found from the RTC extracts of the year 1993 to 1996-97 that the vendor of the petitioner Sri N.C.Vishwanatha, S/o Channegowda, also had acquired the land in question under a registered sale deed and consequently his name was entered in the land records in terms of MR No.19/1985-86. The name of the petitioner was also entered in the land records in terms of MR No.20/1996-97. However in the computerized RTC extract of the year 2021-22, the extent of land in favour of the petitioner is shown as 5 acres. In this regard, the petitioner has given a representation dated 10.03.2022 at Annexure-F to the Tahsildar, Magadi Taluk seeking -4- WP No. 18284 of 2022 rectification of the mistake and to show the extent of land as 5 acres and 29 guntas in terms of the registered sale deed.
4. In the meanwhile, a show cause notice dated 30.05.2022 is said to have been issued by the Tahsildar stating that the petitioner has encroached upon 16 guntas of karab land in Sy.No.212 and therefore the petitioner was called upon to answer why action should not be initiated against the petitioner for the alleged encroachment. The learned counsel submits that a reply dated 09.06.2022 was caused by the petitioner while stating that the petitioner is the absolute owner in occupation of 5 acres and 29 guntas of land in Sy.No.211 in terms of the registered sale deed and that the petitioner has not encroached upon any other land including the land in Sy.No.212 as was made out to be in the show cause notice. Nevertheless, the Tahsildar has proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 23.08.2022 at Annexure-G -5- WP No. 18284 of 2022 directing the revenue inspector to conduct a spot inspection, demarcate the encroached portion, if need be with the assistance of the police and after evicting the petitioner from the encroached portion, to take possession of the karab land. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Moreover, the application filed by the petitioner seeking correction in the revenue records in terms of the registered instrument also remains unconsidered by the Tahsildar.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that having regard to the documents submitted by the petitioner, the matter may be remanded back to the Tahsildar for reconsideration while directing that opportunity of hearing should be given to the petitioner.
6. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of. The impugned order dated 23.08.2022 at Annexure-G -6- WP No. 18284 of 2022 passed by the Tahsildar, Magadi taluk in dispute bearing No.NCR CR/398/21-22; NCR CR/199/2021-22 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Tahsildar, Magadi Taluk to reconsider the matter having regard to the application filed by the petitioner seeking rectification of the land records and more particularly to incorporate 29 guntas along with 5 acres in terms of the schedule shown in the sale deed under which the petitioner acquired title on the land in question. The Tahsidlar is required to have regard to the fact that even the vendor of the petitioner had acquired a title under a registered sale deed and the entire extent of 5 acres and 29 guntas was shown in the land records in the name of the previous owner. The Tahsildar is required to verify the survey settlement records in the presence of the petitioner and find out whether the 29 guntas of land which were sold to the petitioner includes 16 guntas of karab (bavi/Kunte). If the karab portion including 16 guntas of bavi/kunte is attached to the main land, it is not -7- WP No. 18284 of 2022 permissible for the Tahsildar to hold that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation. No doubt, the Tahsildar may pass orders in accordance with law, if it is found that the 16 guntas of karab(bavi/kunte) is 'A' karab land, which can be made use of by the general public, including the petitioner.
Ordered accordingly.
7. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file his memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE KLY/-