Shri Gyanappa S/O Late Mahadevappa ... vs State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2022

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shri Gyanappa S/O Late Mahadevappa ... vs State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2022

Bench: S.G. Pandit

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                  DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                      PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT

                        AND

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

               WA No.100020/2022 (LR)

BETWEEN:

SRI.GYANAPPA S/O LATE MAHADEVAPPA,
GYANAPPA WALIKAR (HOSAMANI)
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/O: HIRE-HONAKUNTI,
POST: JUMBALDINNI,
TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                         ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.BASAVARAJ GODACHI, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA,
      REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
      DEPT OF REVENUE (LAND REFORMS),
      M.S. BUILDING,
      BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
      BAGALKOT DISTRICT,
      BAGALKOT.

3.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
      BAGALKOT SUB DIVISION,
      BAGALKOT.
                             2



4.   THE TAHASILDAR,
     HUNGUND TALUK,
     HUNGUND.
                                      ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.G. K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

     THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING THIS HON'BLE
COURT TO ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE
THE JUDGEMENT DATED 09.12.2021 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED    SINGLE   JUDGE    IN   WRIT   PETITION
NO.107826/2014 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J.,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                       JUDGMENT

The lands in question are measuring 2 acre 24 guntas and 11 acre 27 guntas in Sy.No.59/1A and 59/1C, respectively which are situated in Hire-Hunakuntti village, Taluk Hungund, District Bagalkot.

2. The petitioner before the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.107826/2014 claimed regrant of lands by filing an application under Section 4(1) of the Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act, 1950. The basis for his claim was that he is in possession of the property as on the appointed date and he is entitled for 3 regarnt of the same. Respondent No.3 in the writ petition rejected the application on the ground that the lands in question are already granted in favour of original Inamdar. The order rejecting application for regrant of the said lands was subject matter of challenge in the aforementioned writ petition. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the lands are already regranted in favour of Inamdar.

3. The order of regrant in favour of Inamdar was not called in question before the learned Single Judge. The person in whose favour (Inamdar) the regrant order was made was also not a party to the proceeding before the learned Single Judge. Under the circumstances, the learned Single Judge did not find any illegality or infirmity in the order dated 04.12.2013 which was impugned in the writ petition. Though the writ petition is dismissed, the learned Single Judge has reserved liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order of regrant made in favour of original Inamdar.

4. Under these circumstances, this Court cannot take any exception to the order passed by the learned Single Judge. If it is permissible under law for the appellant to challenge the order of regrant made in favour of original Inamdar, such right having been reserved in terms of the impugned order, this writ appeal deserves to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE sh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court