Karnataka High Court
Shri M Mahadevappa S/O Late Marappa vs State Of Karnataka on 11 July, 2012
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JULY, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
W P NOs. 35274/2010 C/w 35273/2010 (KLR-RR/SUR)
W.P.No.35274/2010
BETWEEN:
M MAHADEVAPPA
S/O LATE MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT KADUJAKKANAHALLI
VILLAGE,
JIGANI HOBLI
ANEKAL TALUK
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C R KRISHNAPPA, ADV.)
AND:
1 STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S.BUILDING
5TH FLOOR, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
2 THE SPL.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE DISTRICT
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 009
3 THE TAHSILDAR
ANEKAL TALUK
TALUK OFFICE COMPOUND
2
ANEKAL
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VIJAY KUMAR 'A' PATIL, HCGP FOR R-1 TO 3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12-10-2009 VIDE ANNEXURE-
A PASSED BY THE R2 - SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
IN CASE NO.RRT (2) CR 15/1999-2000 C/W NO.RRT(2)(A)
CR.1/2006-07 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE LAND
MEASURING 1 ACRE IN ERSTWHILE SURVEY NO.54, NEW
SURVEY NO.54/P11, SITUATE AT KADUJAKKANAHALLI
VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BY CALLING FOR
THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE ABOVE
ENQUIRY BEFORE R2 - SPECIAL DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER.
W.P.No. 35273/2010
BETWEEN:
M.VEERABHADRAPPA
S/O LATE MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/A AADUR VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
ANEKAL TALUK
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT .. PETITIONER
(BY C.R.KRISHNAPPA, ADV)
AND:
1 STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S.BUILDING
5TH FLOOR, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
3
2 THE SPL.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE DISTRICT
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 009
3 THE TAHSILDAR
ANEKAL TALUK
TALUK OFFICE COMPOUND
ANEKAL
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VIJAY KUMAR 'A' PATIL, HCGP FOR R-1 TO 3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12-10-2009 VIDE ANNEXURE-
A PASSED BY THE R2 - SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
AS PER ANNEXURE-A INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO LAND
MEASURING 1 ACRE 20 GUNTAS IN ERSTWHILE SY.NO.54,
NEW SY.NO.54/P/10 SITUATE AT KADUJAKKANAHALLI
VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BY CALLING FOR
THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE ABOVE
ENQUIRY BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT - SPECIAL
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
4
ORDER
Petitioners are seeking for quashing of the order passed by the second respondent dated 12-10-2009 Annexure-A in RRT(2)CR.15/99-2000 clubbed with RRT(2)(A)CR.1/2006-07 whereunder Tahsildar - third respondent has been directed to cancel entries made in the names of petitioners in respect of land in Sy.No.54 and to make entry as "Government".
2. Heard Sri C.R.Krishnappa, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri Vijaykumar Patil, learned HCGP for respondents.
3. Perused the impugned order.
4. Petitioners contend they are absolute owners of land bearing old Sy.No.54 New No.54/P/11 & 54/P/10 measuring 1 acre and 1 acre 20 guntas respectively, 5 situated at Kadujakkanahalli village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, by virtue of grant made in their favour in the year 1995 and after lapse of 5 years, third respondent has referred the matter to second respondent to initiate proceedings under Section136(3) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 by virtue of which, second respondent without issuing any notice to petitioners and without conducting any enquiry and without examining the records, has passed impugned order dated 12-10-2009 as such, petitioners seek for quashing of the same.
5. Learned HCGP would submit that second respondent has arrived at a conclusion that primafacie entries made in revenue records are illegal since it was based on bogus documents and as such, he supports the order passed by second respondent and seeks for dismissal of writ petitions.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of impugned order, it is noticed that 6 third respondent by report dated 5-1-2000 has informed second respondent that lands in Sy.Nos.53 & 54 of Kadujakkanahalli village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, lands were classified as "gomal lands" and some persons are claiming to have been granted different portions and has opined that on verification of original records, entries in revenue records have been made without sanction or grant of land and as such, he has forwarded report to second respondent to initiate proceedings for cancellation of names in revenue records. On the basis of report submitted, second respondent initiated suo-motto proceedings by issuing notice to respondents. Petitioner Sri M Veerabhadrappa (in W.P.No.35273/2010) appeared and filed an application to stay proceedings on the ground that there is an appeal pending in respect of said land before Assistant Commissioner in R.A.49/99-2000. Admittedly, no objections were filed by both petitioners before second respondent. Second respondent based on the report of third respondent Thasildhar has ordered 7 for deletion of names of petitioners from revenue records. It is noticed that in the impugned order, second respondent has referred to report of Tahsildar which reflects that from year 1995-1996 onwards, names of respondents are incorporated in pahani/RTC records both in columns 9 and 12(2). Admittedly, in the instant case, saguvali chits came to be issued by jurisdictional Tahsildar in favour of the Grantees in the year 1995 i.e., on 11-6-1995 which are at Annexure-D in both petitions prior to issuance of Saguvali chits demand was raised by the office of third respondent whereunder petitioners have been called upon to remit a sum of Rs.1,005/- and Rs.1,490/- respectively towards various headings as specified therein. Receipts issued by the Treasury have been produced by petitioners as per Annexure-C in both petitions which reflect that amounts have been deposited by them the Treasury as evidenced from these documents on 5-6-1995. It is thereafter Saguvali Chits have been issued in favour of petitioners as per Annexure-D on 11-6-1995. Pursuant 8 to the same, petitioners have sought for mutating revenue records in their favour and even prior to issuance of Saguvali chit based on possession of petitioners over the lands in question, khata had been mutated to their names as per MR 11/94-95 & 10/94-
95.
7. Admittedly, these documents were not produced before second respondent for the reasons best known by the petitioners. Original of Saguvali Chits was made available to this Court by learned counsel for petitioners for perusal which were also perused by learned HCGP appearing for the State. In view of the fact that these documents were not available before second respondent, no finding has been given by second respondent on these documents. This Court, in exercise of writ jurisdiction would not be in a position to examine the correctness, veracity and authenticity of these documents. Hence, I am of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if impugned order is set aside and petitioners are directed to produce these 9 documents before second respondent for consideration afresh.
8. In view of same following order is passed:
(i) Writ Petitions are hereby allowed.
(ii) Order dated 12-10-2009 passed in
RRT(2)CR.15/99-2000 clubbed with
RRT(2)(A)CR.1/2006-07 - Annexure-A in
both petitions insofar as petitioners are concerned, are hereby quashed.
(iii) Matters are remitted back to second respondent for adjudication afresh and petitioners shall produce all documents in support of their claim before second respondent.
(iv) It is made clear that second respondent would be at liberty to consider correctness, veracity and authenticity of documents and thereafter pass orders on merits in accordance with law.10
(v) In view of the fact that parties are represented before this Court, they are hereby directed to appear before second respondent on 1-8-2012 without waiting for any further notice.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE *sp