Karnataka High Court
Smt. Kamala Raman vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 July, 2014
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION No. 17413/2014 (KLR/RR/SUR)
BETWEEN :
--------------
Smt. KAMALA RAMAN
W/O. Dr. J. RAMAN
D/O. LATE N. RAMAGOWDER
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
No. R-9, EAGLETON GOLF RESORT
30TH KM, BANGALORE MYSORE
HIGHWAY, BIDADI
RAMNAGAR - 56 2109. ... PETITIONER
(BY Sri. RAJENDRA M.S., ADV., FOR
Sri. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADV., FOR
M/S. KESVY & CO., ADVS.)
AND :
-------
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPT., M.S. BUILDINGS
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE RURAL DIST.,
BANGALORE.
2
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE NORTH, K.G. ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 001.
4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
LAND RECORDS
K.G. ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 001.
5. THE TAHSILDAR
BANGALORE EAST
K.R. PURAM
BANGALORE - 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY Sri. H. VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA)
---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A
PRAYER TO CALL FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS WHICH
ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN NON-FIXING OF THE
BOUNDARIES AND ALSO COMPLETING OF THE PHODI
WORK IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE LAND AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT
PASSED THE FOLLOWING;
ORDER
Petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of mandamus to the respondents to fix the boundaries and carry out the phodi work 3 in respect of the land bearing survey No. 11 measuring 3 acres 30 guntas situate at Kyalasanahalli Village, K.R. Pet Hobli, Bangalore East taluk.
2. Petitioner contends that she has purchased the land bearing survey No. 11 of Kyalasanahalli Village, K.R. Pet Hobli, Bangalore East taluk under registered sale deed dated 23.03.1993. The property in question was granted in favour of Sri. Chikkathayappa under a grant order dated 15.11.1941. The issue relating to the validity of the grant was pending in proceedings in RRT(2)CR 29/2002-03. The Special Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 17.06.2009 (Annexure N) has found that the grant made in favour of the vendor of the petitioner is valid. In that view the revenue entries also stand in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner is presently seeking for phodi of the said land and fixing of the boundaries. Despite the representation at Annexure Q dated 06.02.2012 since the respondent authorities have not taken any action, the petitioner is before this Court.
4
3. On issue of notice in this petition, learned Additional Government Advocate has secured instructions. Sri. Anil Kumar, Revenue Inspector, K.R. Puram, Bangalore East is present in Court and based on his instructions learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that in respect of few other grants made in the vicinity in the adjacent survey numbers, the grants were found to be invalid by the Special Deputy Commissioner and the matter is pending before this Court. In that view it is contended that there was some delay in holding the phodi work since all the records were sought in the said proceedings. It is also pointed out that subsequent to the representation dated 06.02.2012 intimation has been issued to the petitioner on 11.12.2012 calling upon the petitioner to produce the necessary documents which the petitioner is required to comply.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would however contend that the required documents have been submitted since they have also been listed out in the representation dated 06.02.2012. This Court need not enter into that aspect of the matter since in any event 5 the respondents would have to satisfy the authorities with regard to the availability of the necessary documents before the phodi work is undertaken. Hence if any further documents which are relevant are required by respondent No. 4, respondent No. 4 shall intimate the petitioner in that regard. In any event considering the fact that the grant in favour of the vendor of the petitioner has already been upheld the document in that regard be accepted by respondent No. 4 and thereafter appropriate steps be taken to complete the phodi work and fixing the boundaries in respect of the property.
5. At this point I also find it necessary to record a word of caution since the learned Additional Government Advocate has brought to the notice of this Court that the grant certificate in respect of certain other owners is under cloud and the matter is pending before this Court. In that regard it is made clear that while carrying out the phodi work of the petitioner if any other neighboring land owners are to be notified and in such situation if respondent No. 4 is required to notify the adjacent occupants of the land belonging to the 6 petitioner, the same would only be for the purpose of completing the formality of carrying out the phodi work and such person receiving notice shall not hold the same against the Government in any other proceedings. This clarification has been made since this order pertains only to the right of the petitioner to secure the phodi work as the grant of the vendor of the petitioner has been upheld.
6. Respondent No. 4 shall now, therefore, issue appropriate notice to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of copy of this order being made available to respondent No. 4. In such notice all requirements to be complied by the petitioner shall be indicated and thereafter phodi work shall be completed in an expeditious manner. In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed off.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
LRS