Karnataka High Court
Mrs Rajeshwari W/O Late Narayanappa vs State Of Karnataka on 9 July, 2012
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH
WP No.2625/2012 (LR)
BETWEEN :
1 Mrs.RAJESHWARI
W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
D/O LATE CHIKKA YELLAIAH
R/AT BHEEMASANDRA
BELLAVI ROAD, TUMKUR.
2 Mrs.SOWBHAGYA
W/O SRINIVASAIAH
D/O LATE CHIKKA YELLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT BHEEMASANDRA
BELLAVI ROAD, TUMKUR.
3 Mrs.JAYALAKSHMI
W/O.SRINVIASAIAHA
D/O LATE CHIKKAYELLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT BHEEMASANDRA
BELLAVI ROAD, TUMKUR.
4 Mrs.RENUKAMMA
W/O LATE CHIKKAYELLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT LAKSHIPURA
RAMANAGARA TALUK.
2
5 Mr.PATTARAJU
S/O.LATE CHIKKA YELLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT BHEEMASANDRA
BELLAVI ROAD, TUMKUR.
6 Mrs.JAGANNAMMA
W/O.J RANGASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/o.BHEEMASANDRA
BELLAVI ROAD, TUMKUR.
7 Mr.NARASIMHA MURTHY
S/O.LATE CHIKKA YELLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/o.BHEEMASANDRA
BELLAVI ROAD, TUMKUR.
8 Mrs,PRABHAVATHAMMA
W/O LATE GOVINDAIAH
D/O SUBBANNA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/o.GARDEN ROAD
AGARAHARA, NEAR KHAZANE
MANDIRA, TUMKUR TOWN.
9 Mr.VENAKTESH
S/O GOVINDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/o.GARDEN ROAD
AGRAHARA, NEAR KHAZANE
MANDIRA, TUMKUR TOWN.
10 Mrs.RAJESHWARI
W/O.H KRISHNAPPA
D/O SUBBANNA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/o.BELLAVI HBOLI,
TUMKUR.
3
11 Mr.CHANDRA BABU
S/O.SUBBANNA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/o.BELLAVI HOBLI,
TUMKUR. ...PETITIONERS
(By Sri. B M SHYAM PRASAD & ASSOCIATES, ADVs.)
AND :
1 STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY
VIDHANA OSUDHA
BANGALORE -01.
2 THE LAND TRIBUNAL
TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR
REP. BY THE DEPUTY
COMMISSOINER
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSONER
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER
TUMKUR TLAUK,
TUMKUR.
4 THE TAHSILDAR
OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR
TUMKUR TALUK.
5 YELLAMAM DEVARA DATTI
VOKKODI VILLAGE. ...RESPONDENTS
(By Sri SHASHIDHAR S KARAMADI, HCGP FOR R1-4)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the
order dated 20.6.2011 in proceedings INA No.5/2003-
04 (Annexure-K) by the 2nd respondent and direct the
4
respondents to direct the petitioners No.8 to 11 as the
occupant of the land measuring 1 acre 14 guntas in
Sy.No.70, Vokkodi village, Bellavi Hobli, Tumkur Taluk
and District and issue appropriate certificate and
mutation of the katha for this land in favour of
respondents No.8 to 11 as contemplated under the
provision of Mysore (Religious and Charitable
Institutions) Inams Abolition Act.
This writ petition coming on for preliminary
hearing in `B' group this day, the Court passed the
following:
ORDER
The petitioners in this writ petition are questioning the order dated 20.6.2011 in proceedings INA No.5/2003-04 by the 2nd respondent rejecting the claim of petitioners No.8 to 11 for grant of occupancy rights to an extent of 1 acre 14 guntas in Sy.No.70 of Vokkodi village, Bellavi Hobli, Tumkur Taluk, vide Annexure-K on the ground that they have not made separate application for grant of occupancy right within the time prescribed under the provisions of Karnatka (Religious and ) Inams Abolition Act, 1961 (for short `Act') and directed the 4th respondent - Tahsildar, Tumkur to auction usufructs raised in the land in question and 5 remit the same in the account of the temple/5 th respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for both sides.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, one Chikkayellaiah said to have filed an application for regrant of land to the extent of 2 acres 34 guntas. However, he was in possession and cultivation to the extent of 1 acre 20 guntas of land. Likewise one Govindaiah also had filed an application for grant of 1 acre 14 guntas of land. After passing of the impugned order vide Annexure-K, the legal representatives of Govindaiah had filed WP No.29414/1994 challenging the order dated 18.11.1988 registering Chikkayellaiah as occupant of 1 acre 14 guntas of land in Sy.No.70 and rejecting the claim insofar as the same extent of land. The said writ petition by order dated 25.7.2003, was allowed and the matter was remanded to the Land Tribunal to conduct enquiry in respect of 1 acre 14 guntas of land. After remand, the Land Tribunal once again, has rejected the claim for 1 acre 14 guntas of land by the impugned 6 order. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners are before this court in this writ petition.
4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances stated above, I feel that there is no need to file a separate application as there is no partition by metes of bounds between all brothers. An application filed by one of the family members for regrant will enure to the benefit of the family members. As no arrangement is made between the family members that will not take away the right of the petitioners on the ground that there was no partition in the family.
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 20.6.2011 in proceedings INA No.5/2003-04 passed by the 2nd respondent, Annexure-K is quashed. There is no necessity to file separate application by the petitioners for regrant under the Act. The matter is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur, to consider the case of the petitioners for regrant in accordance of law.
7
The Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 in four weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE bkm.