Karnataka High Court
Veerabhadrappa Shetty S/O Sharabanna ... vs Budi Basaveshwara Shivacharaya ... on 28 June, 2023
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB
CCC No. 200016 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
CCC NO.200016 OF 2023 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
1. VEERABHADRAPPA SHETTY S/O SHARABANNA
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: JALAHALLI, TQ: DEVADURGA
DIST: RAICHUR-584 111
2. SHARANAPPA S/O BASSAPPA SHETTY
AGE: 86 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: JALAHALLI, TQ: DEVADURGA
Digitally signed DIST: RAICHUR-584 111
by SWETA
KULKARNI
Location: HIGH 3. B. NAGAPPA S/O SIDDALINGAPPA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGE: 81 YEARS,
R/O: DEVADURGA, DIST: RAICHUR-584 111
...COMPLAINANTS
(BY SRI SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI BUDHI BASAVESHWARA MATH
BY PEETHADIPATHI
SRI BUDI BASAVESHWARA SHIVACHARAYA SWAMIJI
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB
CCC No. 200016 of 2023
AGE: MAJOR, MATHADHIPATI OF SRI
BOOIBASAVESHWARA MATH,
VILLAGE GABBUR, TQ: DEVADURGA,
DIST: RAICHUR-584 111
2. SRI RAJANIKANTH
AGE: MAJOR, CHAIRMEN OF LAND TRIBUNAL
DEVADURGA, OCC: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
RAICHUR SUB-DIVISION, RAICHUR-584 101
3. SRI BALAYYA YARGUDDA
AGE: MAJOR,
MEMBER OF LAND TRIBUNAL, DEVADURGA,
R/O: VILLAGE YARAGUDDA
TQ: DEVADURGA, DIST: RAICHUR-584 111
4. SRI PRABHU KARIGER
AGE: MAJOR,
MEMBER OF LAND TRIBUNAL, DEVADURGA,
R/O: VILLAGE GABBUR
TQ: DEVADURGA, DIST: RAICHUR-584 111
...ACCUSED
5. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
...PROFORMA PARTY
(BY SRI R.S. SIDHAPURKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R/A1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R/A2 AND R/A5;
SRI RAVINDRA D.K. AND MAHADEV S. PATIL, ADVOCATES FOR
R/A3 AND R/A4)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB
CCC No. 200016 of 2023
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5 FOR
HAVING WILLFULLY DISOBEYED THE ORDER ISSUED BY THIS
COURT IN WP NO.11422/2006 DATED 09.01.2014 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND THE ORDER DATED 15.03.2021 IN WA
NO.200583/2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-B, AND PUNISH THE
ACCUSED/ RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 IN ACCORDANCE WITH
LAW, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
B.M. SHYAM PRASAD J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The complainants, who are the respondents in Writ Petition No.11422/2006 and the subsequent intra Court appeal in Writ Appeal No.200583/2014 which are disposed of on 09.01.2014 and 15.03.2021 respectively, have filed this complaint alleging that the present respondents - accused are in deliberate disobedience of the orders in the aforesaid proceedings because a report is prepared by the second to fourth respondents as members of the Land Tribunal, Devadurga to favour the first respondent.
2. The crux of the complaint is that a concession is made in the writ petition in W.P.No.11422/2006 stating that -4- NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB CCC No. 200016 of 2023 an extent of 2 acres 20 guntas in Sy.No.273/1 and 273/2 of Devadurga village is being utilized as burial ground and the first respondent will not stake any claim over the same and it can be continued to be used as a burial ground, and this concession is once again reiterated in the writ appeal. Notwithstanding the same, while deciding on the merits of the first respondent's claim on remand, the second to fourth respondents as the members of the Land Tribunal have generated a report to conclude that only an extent of 1 acre 32 guntas [as against an extent of 2 acres 20 guntas] is used as burial ground and thus yielding an advantage to the first respondent contrary to the concession as aforesaid.
3. The second respondent - the Assistant Commissioner as the Chairperson of the Land Tribunal, Devadurga has filed his affidavits on 13.03.2023 and today. It is stated in these affidavits that because of conflicting reports on record, a survey was deemed appropriate and was accordingly conducted on 12.08.2022 after issuance of notice. It is ascertained that the actual measurement of the area used as burial ground is 1 acre 32 guntas, and even -5- NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB CCC No. 200016 of 2023 during the present contempt proceedings, another survey is conducted on 13.06.2023 after due notice to the complainants. This survey is conducted using Differential Global Positioning System [DGPS]. It is confirmed in this survey that an extent of 1 acre 32 guntas in the aforesaid survey numbers is used as burial ground, that the adjacent narrow strip along the southern boundary [measuring 9.72 meters in width] is used by the public as access, and that this strip is also used by those who use the burial ground.
4. When queried, the Assistant Commissioner submits that his assessment is that the first respondent cannot claim any exclusive right or interest in the extent of 10 guntas because it is being used by the public. Sri Mallikarjun C. Basareddy, the learned Government Advocate, also supplements stating that because of the present circumstances a review petition is presently filed for review of the order dated 15.03.2021 in the Writ Appeal No.200583/2014.
-6-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB CCC No. 200016 of 2023
5. Sri Sachin M. Mahajan, the learned counsel for the complainant, responding to these circumstances and submissions that are now placed on record, submits that these are factual assertions which he may not be in a position to respond to unless he has specific instructions from his clients - the complainants. However, none dispute that the complainants have called in question the Land Tribunal's order in a writ petition which is pending consideration.
6. The merits of the exercise undertaken and the conclusions that are drawn by the Land Tribunal will have to be necessarily examined in that writ petition and perhaps in the review petition now filed, but the complainants, who are served with the documents today, cannot be prejudiced if these proceedings are closed. If the respondents have acted beyond jurisdiction or otherwise, that will be a matter for scrutiny in the appropriate proceedings, and the complainants must be reserved liberty in this regard. On the continuation of the proceedings against the respondents, -7- NC: 2023:KHC-K:4656-DB CCC No. 200016 of 2023 this Court is satisfied that there is no deliberate disobedience.
Hence, reserving all just liberties to the complainants, the proceedings stand dropped.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE SWK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10