Karnataka High Court
Bhimbai W/O Prabuling Minajagi And Anr vs The Regional Commissioner & Ors on 10 July, 2019
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N.Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2019
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR
WRIT APPEAL NOS.200085-86/2016 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
1. Bhimbai W/o Prabuling Minajagi
Age: 56 years, Occ: Agriculture
2. Mallikarjun S/o Prabhuling Minajagi
Age: 38 years, Occ: Agriculture,
Both R/o Jagath, Upper Lane,
Kalaburagi.
...Appellants
(By Sri Srivatsa Senior counsel for
Sri G.S. Biradar & Sri V.G. Biradar, Advocates)
AND:
1. The Regional Commissioner
Kalaburagi- 585 101.
2. The Deputy Commissioner
Kalaburagi, Dist.Kalaburagi- 585 101.
3. The Tahasildar, Kalaburagi - 585 101.
2
4. The Karnataka State Board of Wakf
"Darul A Wakf" No.6,
Cunningham Road, Bangalore - 560 052.
5. Hazarath Syed Shah Kabibullah Hussaini
(Sunni), Badepur, Roza,
Kalaburagi- 585 102.
6. Darga Hazarath Khaja
Bande Nawaz Dargah,
Kalaburagi, represented
by its Mutwalli - 585 102.
... Respondents
(By Sri K.M.Ghate, AGA for R1 to R3;
Sri Mohd. Khader Khan Advocate for R4;
R5 served; Sri S.R.Malgatti, Advocate for R6)
These Writ appeals are filed under Section 4 of the
Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, praying to allow the appeal
and set aside the order dated 20.01.2016 in
W.P.No.87950/2012 by the Hon'ble Court, etc.
These appeals coming on for admission, this day,
K.N.PHANEENDRA J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
The appellants claiming that they are the legal representatives of one Prabhuling S/o Parutappa Minajagi who was grantee of land bearing Sy.No.115 to the extent of 3 acres 30 guntas and 30 guntas in Sy.No.116 of Badepur in Gulbarga by orders of the Land Tribunal and 3 the father's name of the appellants were recorded in the record of rights as per Annexure-D appended to the writ petition in W.P.Nos.87950-951/2012. It also claimed that an extent of 5 acres 28 guntas in Sy.No.111/A of Gulbarga also stood in the name of Parutappa Basavannappa Minajagi; Shivaraya and Dhulappa S/o Chandramappa Jola; Prabhuling Parutappa Minajagi, Sharanamma Shivasharanappa Chapped, Channamallappa Sharanappa. On the death of Prabhuling it appears that the petitioner/appellants made an application and got the mutation entered into their names to the extent of 1 acre of land in Sy.No.111/A; 3 acres 30 guntas in Sy.No.115/AA and 30 guntas in Sy.No.116/A.
2. It is alleged that abruptly the Deputy Commissioner has passed an order as per Annexure-G4 deleting the names of the appellants and recorded the name of the Government in the ROR of said land even without giving any opportunity to the parties and without 4 following any procedure under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. It was in utter violation of principles of natural justice. On that ground the petitioners have approached the writ Court in W.P.No.87950-951/2012. However, the writ petitions were rejected reserved liberty to the petitioners to question the order of the Deputy Commissioner invoking Section 56 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The said order being challenged in the writ appeal.
3. In the similar facts and circumstances of the case, the other person by name Mallinath s/o Channamallappa Hunnalli, whose name was also deleted from the lands and the same order of the Deputy Commissioner was called in question in W.P.No.103322/2013 similarly the said writ petition was rejected by the learned Single Judge. The said Mallinath has challenged the said order in Writ Appeal in W.A.No.200084/2016 and the Division Bench of this 5 Court vide orders dated 10.10.2018 set aside the order of the learned Single Judge by allowing the writ appeal and remitted the matter to the Tahsildar i.e. respondent No.3 therein with a direction to reconsider the entries in the revenue records after providing opportunity of hearing to both the parties and notifying the interested persons and thereafter the Tahsildar has to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
4. The appellant also stands on the same footing as that of the appellant in W.A.No.200084/2016. In fact, the same order of the Deputy Commissioner was also called in question in the said writ petition and consequently, the said order was set aside in the writ appeal. Therefore, similar order requires to be passed in this case also. Therefore, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Writ appeal is allowed.6
The order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.87950-951/2012 dated 20.01.2016 is hereby set aside. The matter stands remitted to the Tahsildar i.e. respondent No.3 with a direction that the Tahsildar has to consider the entries in the records of rights and after providing opportunity to the petitioners/appellants and other interested parties in respect of above noted survey numbers noted in the body of this order and after following the procedure of law the Tahsildar has to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE sdu