Karnataka High Court
Sri.A.P.Harry vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 January, 2022
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 810 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. A.P. HARRY
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
S/O LATE POOVAIAH,
R/ OF 7TH HOSAKOTE VILLAGE
SUNTIKOPPA HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT-571236 ....PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B.S.NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI
BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KODAGU DISTRICT
MADIKERI-571201
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI-571201
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
SOMWARPET SUB-DIVISION,
SOMWARPET, KODAGU DISTRICT-571236
2
5. THE THASILDAR
SOMWARPET TALUK,
SOMWARPET,
KODAGU DISTRICT-571236
6. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
OF LAND RECORDS,
SOMWARPET TALUK, SOMWARPET
KODAGU DISTRICT-571236 ....RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R.SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R5-TAHSILDAR TO CONSIDER
THE MEMORANDUM DATED 22.07.2016 IN REF. ISSUED
BY THE R2-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TO CONDUCT
DURSTHI OF PETITIONERS LAND TO AN EXTENT OF
0.50 ACRES IN SY.NO.109/97 SITUATED AT 7TH
HOSAKOTE VILLAGE, SUNTIKOPPA HOBLI, SOMWARPET
TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT COPY AT ANNEXURE-A AND
ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned AGA is directed to take notice for all the respondents.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that although the Deputy Commissioner had considered the 3 application filed by the petitioner seeking phodi and durasthi and issued appropriate direction to 5th respondent-Tahsildar to verify the original grant register to find out whether there was a grant made in favour of the petitioner's vendor and thereafter, proceed to carry out the phodi and durasthi work; the 5th respondent- Tahsildar has not complied with the directions issued by the Deputy Commissioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to a communication dated 12.01.2018 made by the Technical Assistant of the Deputy Commissioner and 6th respondent-Assistant Director of Land Records as to how the Tahsildar will have to proceed i.e., to verify the original grant register and if the same is not available then to place the matter before the Committee for missing file re-construction and re-construct the file regarding grant and thereafter, proceed to make the phodi and durasthi work. In spite of this specific direction given, the 5th respondent- Tahsildar has done nothing in this regard. Therefore, the 4 prayer in this writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 5th respondent-Tahsildar, to consider the Memorandum dated 22.07.2016 bearing No.CºÀªÁ®Ä/15/2016-17 at Annexure-A followed by the Communication dated 12.01.2018 at Annexure-A2 and conduct the phodi and durasthi work in respect of 0.50 acres in Sy.No.109/97 situated of 7th Hoskote Village, Suntikoppa Hobli, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate and on perusal of the petition papers, this Court finds that there is substance in the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of specific directions having been given by the Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy Director of Land Records, the 5th respondent-Tahsildar has not complied with the direction.
5. Therefore, this Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to 5th respondent-Tahsildar, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District to act in accordance 5 with the directions given by the Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy Director of Land Records, 3rd respodnent-Tahsildar, Assistant Director of Land Records as noticed herein above and pass necessary orders and carry out the phodi and durasthi work in respect of land in question as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE rv