Karnataka High Court
Sri. B Ramappa, vs Smt. A Gangamma on 28 March, 2011
Equivalent citations: 2012 (2) AIR KAR R 532, (2012) 2 KCCR 1163 (2012) 3 KANT LJ 295, (2012) 3 KANT LJ 295
Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar
Bench: D V.Shylendra Kumar
.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR.
Writ Petition
AND
mh
identified or classified as SC/ST under the provisions of
wd
oF THE [DEY PLUTY COR
GELLARY DISTRICT
BELLARY.
a
3, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
HOSPET, BELLARY DISTRICT.
By Sri FLV. Patil,
Smt. Meghna Kolekar: G. p
THIS WRIT PETITION IS F
OF THE CONSTITUITION:|.OF INT
IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED & rE
BEARING NOK PARABAI 2b 35 aS
NO Sant ean! AND. DEPU TY Col MMU
NOUS /KAM/ APPES AL {197 2002, ao
AL NESURE Ch : , :
f
ok
'ORDE . BEA LRENG
26 $04 S20 10
0197.OF 3011418. Fi
ACE ATING STAY, :
MISC. WNC.
CPC, PRAYING TOW
INDER SECTION 1517 OF
THIS PETITION A/W MISC.W. COMING ON
HEARING 'THIS DAY, THE COURT MA ADE THE FOLLOWING:
Purchasers of agricultural land granted to persons
belonging to scheduled ¢ astes/tribes or depressed classes
as were otherwise known prior to such persons being
red
seb,
» Constitution of India, are a disgruntled and disillusioned lot
anc with the draconian provisions of The Karnataka
"one measuring S acres 60 cents in Sy
66 cents m Sy No S89/1C, both situated a
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of
Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 for short, the. Acti,
loads the dice against such persons who only fight. a losing
battle before the authorities and tribunals. and. only. ,
possibility being to prolong the litigation ag far as possible,
so that the enjoyment of the purctiased, land. 1s lso co-
extensive with the life of litigation !
2. Present writ petition is no, ext eption, particuuarly as
the petitioners have a. few grov inds to urge in this writ
petition and are! advaricec in a very articulate manner by
Sri V P Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. Fact Ss "leading to the present petition are that one
"Aralihalli: Karivappa | iad been granted two parcels of lands,
order dated 9-1-1959 and another parce! of land measuring
ry _ et 5 rable ra bre seyqeya mae beg iy beolssle Lys
Danayakanakeri village, Hagaribommananalh taluk of the
ae)
ie
then Bellary district under the 5 Standing Orders of Board of
Revenue of erstwhile Madras state.
revenue authorities, a person belongine te
a
Nae!
community and the grants made in th 16-year 1as6 and (968
are governed by the standing orders. of the, Board of
Revenue, State of Madras:
3. Grants of this nature carried a condition that granted
land shoulc not. be' alienated fora oeriod of ten years from
the date of ere aint && sis inco srporated in one grant order 1.e.,
of the year 1960 1 utr not. found im the earher grant order
dated 9.1. 195 59, but nevertheless. the grant being subject to
the Board Standing Orders, is also @ grant which is
'statutorily fimpressed with this condition,
such lands which were transacted by the grantee
6
"DV mortgage of the subject land in favour of one Bukkitgar
Hall vermma, wife of Ramappa as per mortgage deed dated
E rs
4. The grantee was even as per the verification by the.
_ Valmiki»
2.12.1968. Said Huligemma had filed a suit In OS No. 166
of 1973 on the file of the court of the Principal, Munsiff,
Hospet. for foreclosure which came to be decreed ant
court auction sale, properties were purchased by. legal heirs.
of the very decree holder. Thus, the mor 1gage Ee claimed Jul
ownership after having enf orcedt foreciosure of the: mortgage
and due to the default of they raorl gage ne and while tne
matter stood thus, subsequent, development is that the
Karnataka Act No.2 of 1979 canie into et fect from 1.1.1979.
Though the. Act: the into force in the year 1979, the legal
heirs of tie otiginat grantee Ar aiihalli Karivappa, one Smt.
A Gangemma filed an "application before the Assistant
Commissioner, ink application No.35/2005-06. The
"application was enatlired into but the revenue authorities
oe
"having im pl ieade 4 Smt. B Huligemma, wife of S Ramappa as
rst respondent and Sri. Uppar Hanumanthappa as second
respondent and it is strangely indicated that they were represented by counsel but it is not very clear as to whether "ap was for first respondent - Smt. B Muligemma or second "y missioner, Pit i Cor _ 'S 2 x xy = a F a jus a w Lane a, sn ~_ o a 4 os oo Lu c ~ v
-- ae wo --L = ' Ge on, einen mh -
a Le :
a) dom pine an : a oo 'gig oun, "ae DOSTPIOT Mis i PS ak f OF} t i 1 PEROT a Mead iH eo and' the'Presidentia Order of the butait cam never be construed as to deprive the eflect which to scheduled tribe community for the reason that valaiki community was even before notified as schedu the State of Madras as per Presidential Noniication- dated 10.8.1950, that the community . being Jéentified ; as.
scheduled caste community as per.the Presidential OF dei c oF the vear 1950 itself and the notification being areas covering the place of FeORENE of the respondents' within this father and the subject iand also: bein area, the Presiden Ve al Order of the year 1950 has ensured that valmiki comm unity'is A sched wied caste comm umity in inal area; the the' inere fac wt that the area in the former Bellary Bistriet in Hadras 'State got merged with Karnataka after reorganiz ration of the State cannot make any difference ay (O50 i at all can ian an o other non-notified areas of Karnataka es rat rot y Ines tet oo grb "ye ey a e ms ae he wen, ie pio.
oct State. in faveur of persons belongi
-had--already been conferred on members of valmik! "community in terms of the Presidential Order of the vear win respect of "gh 1950 in areas to which it had been made applicable and statutorily imposed under standing orders ot the Madras, namely, non-alienation.for ter years: is clearly:
lollowed when the subject property. 1s transac sted in une. year 1968 and consequence necessarily follows. and. ther re is no question in the arguinents advanced on behalf of the petitioner and therefore «urges 'for. dismissal of the writ petition.
1S. 1 have "bestowed my attention to the submissions made at.the Bar - pe cruséd t the orders and the record.
16. The Karnataka Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 is a piece. of socid-. welfare legislation, meant to extend the benelit in favour of persons belonging to scheduled caste and. scheduled tribe communities. This is done to ensure a facility or concession shown in their favour by the State is oa 'Fetained and sustained to them and not that they lose it eae B Sal Leth a on seu 7 ry ca : Sat ef"
vi G3 on no es we ae som i a aa O Peon maa ee ¥ a _ ~ CS i Nee! Smt 16 ay f nade we HB B "LO "as
-- oe ne ; She! ven of vee cam 'oo fa obo mm ~~ on Sen - Mot 7 jut a nA oo os o ae we wo fF
- se : we, ~ fe Y soe = = = am - at ee et , a po pont al a o a ~ oa - Sn Soe Aa ae Se va :
trie ee = iu 4 = 7 a 8 4 urity joe? , % a 43 Sa il of pent
-- ot ef oy mage a Fact ope ora ea joa -- on enn, al : we Me at leet sone wy ee 4 SE CSS! sy Dass i J LOE i i POSSESS SE PETY "
aks fe POSS Pac BR a a 7 .
a HY eo ae y a SSeS "At hae Ne ah ho must be from the legislative scheme and for alding the implementation legislative provisions purpose of legisiation.
23. {tis for this reason, this writ petit! ion is dismissed. 24, However, in the peculiar'facts and. circumstances, In view of cismisseab of t) ; rain, writ petition, Mi Cvl, 60197 of 201) for-vacating sta ns tte eren ed fay is allowed,