Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Sarojini vs The Govt Of Karnataka And Ors on 18 December, 2023

Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur

Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur

                                                -1-
                                                      NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279
                                                       WP No. 207289 of 2017




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                         DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
                        WRIT PETITION NO.207289 OF 2017 (GM-WAKF)
                   BETWEEN:

                        SMT.SAROJINI
                        W/O.GURAPPA MULLAL
                        AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
                        OCC: AGRICULTURE
                        R/AT AFZALPUR-585 301
                        DIST: KALABURAGI

                                                                ...PETITIONER

                   (BY SRI S.S.HALALLI, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   THE GOVT. OF KARNATAKA
                        DEPT. OF REVENUE
                        VIKASA SOUDHA
Digitally signed
by SACHIN               BENGALURU-560 001
Location: HIGH          REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   2.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
                        KALABURAGI DISTRICT
                        KALABURAGI-585 104

                   3.   THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
                        KALABURAGI DIVISION
                        KALABURAGI-585 104

                   4.   THE TAHASILDAR
                        AFZALPURA TALUKA
                        AFZALPUR-585 301
                                  -2-
                                        NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279
                                          WP No. 207289 of 2017




5.   THE KARNATAKA STATE
     BOARD OF WAKF
     DARUL AWKAF
     NO.6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD
     BENGALURU-560 052
     REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

6.   THE KAZAT (SUNNI)
     AFZALPUR
     DIST: KALABURAGI-585 301
     REPT. BY ITS MANAGER/MUTAVALLI

                                                 ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI G.B.YADAV, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4;
    SRI P.S.MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
    SRI MOHD. KHADAR KHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R6)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE MUTATION ORDER DATED 20.05.2014 VIDE MR.
NO.H 202/2013-14 (ANNEXURE-M) PASSED BY RESPONDENT
NO.4-TAHSILDAR AND FURTHER DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.4-
TAHSILDER TO RETAIN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE
RTC AND ETC.

       THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 4, Sri P.S.Malipatil, learned counsel for respondent No.5 and Sri Mohd. Khader Khan, learned counsel for respondent No.6. -3-

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279 WP No. 207289 of 2017

2. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the mutation order dated 20.05.2014 vide M.R.No.H 202/2013- 14 passed by respondent No.4-Tahsildar vide Annexure-M.

3. The petitioner contends that the land bearing Sy.No.677 measuring 37 acres 11 guntas situated at Afzalpur was granted in favour of one Sri Muneeruddin Bashasab by an order of the Land Tribunal dated 22.12.1981 and the occupancy certificate was also issued on 25.03.1985. The original grantee later transferred the said land in the name of his son, Syed Fayuzuddin after taking permission from respondent No.3- Assistant Commissioner by an order dated 13.01.1987 sold the said land bearing Sy.No.677/2/2 measuring 5 acres sold in favour of the petitioner by a registered sale deed dated 30.03.2001. Pursuant to the said sale deed, the name of the petitioner was entered in the Record of Rights and continued till 2013-14 and she has been in possession of the said land till date.

4. Respondent No.5-Wakf Board by letter dated 08.07.2008 has requested respondent No.4-Tahsildar to effect the mutation in the name of Wakf Board in respect of 38 survey -4- NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279 WP No. 207289 of 2017 numbers including Sy.No.677. Respondent No.4-Tahsildar in pursuance to the said letter dated 08.07.2008 passed a common order dated 29.01.2010 for effecting the mutation in the name of respondent No.5-Wakf Board in respect of all 27 survey numbers. The said letter dated 08.07.2008 and the common order dated 29.01.2010 were challenged before this Court in WP.No.81503/2011. This Hon'ble Court vide its order dated 21.04.2011 quashed the said letter dated 08.07.2008 and common order dated 29.01.2010 and directed respondent No.4-Tahsildar to reconsider the order of the Land tribunal.

5. Respondent No.4-Tahsildar, in view of the aforesaid order, retained the name of the petitioner in the RTC by an order dated 13.03.2013 and the same has been confirmed by the order of respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner by an order dated 29.11.2013. Pursuant to the orders of respondent No.4-Tahsildar and respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner, the name of the petitioner was effected in the RTC by mutation order dated 13.03.2013 by removing the name of the Wakf Board.

-5-

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279 WP No. 207289 of 2017

6. This being the state of affairs, respondent No.4- Tahsildar, without any basis and cogent reason and without affording any opportunity or provide notice to the petitioner, has entered the name of respondent No.6-Kazat in the RTC. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order of change of entries in the name of respondent No.6.

7. The main attack of learned counsel for petitioner is on the ground that respondent Nos.1 to 4 - authorities have not issued notice and have not heard the petitioner while passing the impugned order and have changed the entries in the name of respondent No.6 in the RTC.

8. The fundamental rule of law is that while Government and other authorities pass any order, it is incumbent upon them to issue notice to the aggrieved/concerned party and provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the party and pass suitable orders in accordance with law. In the present case, admittedly, no notice has been issued to the petitioner by respondent No.4, which is a clear violation of principles of natural justice.

-6-

NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279 WP No. 207289 of 2017

9. In view of above discussion, I proceed to pass the following :

ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed;

      (ii)     The entries in the name of respondent No.6 in

               mutation       order     dated      20.05.2014          vide

               M.R.No.H       202/2013-14              in    respect     of

               petitioner's     land         bearing        Sy.No.677/2/2

measuring an extent of 5 acres situated at Afzalpur Taluk vide Annexure-M, is hereby quashed;
(iii) Consequently, the entries made by respondent No.4-Tahsildar in the name of respondent No.6 shall be deleted in RTC within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and restore the same in the name of the petitioner;
(iv) Liberty is reserved to the authorities to issue fresh notice to the petitioner and respondent No.6 and initiate any further action against the petitioner by providing a proper opportunity of -7- NC: 2023:KHC-K:9279 WP No. 207289 of 2017 hearing to the concerned parties by following due process of law and the principles of natural justice before passing any such order;
(v) No order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22