Karnataka High Court
Sanganagouda Lachamannagouda ... vs The State Of Karnataka & Ors on 25 August, 2014
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
Bench: S.N.Satyanarayana
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA BENCH
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.202149/2014 (KLR-RR-SUR)
BETWEEN
SANGANAGOUDA LACHAMANNAGOUDA MALIPATIL
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
1. NEELAMMA
W/O LATE SANGANAGOUDA
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
2. NANDAGOUDA
S/O LATE SANGANAGOUDA
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
3. RAVIKUMAR
S/O LATE SANGANAGOUDA
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
4. SUMANGALA
W/O BASAVARAJ
D/O LATE SANGANAGOUDA
AGE: 38 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE HOLD & AGRICULTURE
5. SHARADA W/O MALLANNA
D/O LATE SANGANAGOUDA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
-2-
ALL R/O ULLESUGUR
SHAHAPUR, DIST. YADGIRI.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE, ADV.)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
YADGIRI.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
YADGIRI SUB-DIVISION,
YADGIRI.
4. MALLAPPA
S/O SHIVALINGAPPA CHELVADI
AGE: 59 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
5. YALLAPPA
S/O SHIVALINGAPPA CHALVADI
AGE: 57 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
6. MARLINGAPPA
S/O NINGAPPA PUJARI
AGE: 55 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
ALL ARE R/O ULLESUGUR
-3-
TQ. SHAHAPUR
DIST. YADGIRI.
...
RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR R. TENGLI,
ADDL. GOVT. ADV., FOR R1 TO R3
SRI N. KRISHNACHARYA AND
SRI RAMACHANDRA K. ADV., FOR R4 & R5
R6 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTON OF INDIA, PRAYING
TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIRORARI AND GRANT ANY
OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE FOLLOWING TERMS:
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12.04.2012 PASSED IN FILE
No.RP/70/2004-05 BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
YADGIRI, THE CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS AT
ANNEXURE-F, CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED
24.08.2004 PASSED IN CASE
NO.:REV/ROR/MUT/62/2003, THE CERTIFIED COPY OF
WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-D.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Petitioners herein are impugning the order dated 12/04/2012 passed by respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner, Yadgiri, in Revision Petition No.70/2004-05, wherein the order dated 24.08.2004 passed by respondent -4- No.3 - Assistant Commissioner, Yadgiri, in case No.REV/ROR/MUT/62/2003-04, is confirmed.
2. The brief facts leading to this petition are as under:-
Late Sanganagouda, the husband of Petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner Nos.2 to 5 along with three other persons gave an application to the Village Accountant stating that in respect of land bearing Sy. Nos.79/4, 79/6 and 55/2 situate in Ullesugoor village, Shahpur Taluk, Yadgir District, there was variance between the entries in the record of rights and actual possession. They contended in their application that, they were in possession of the said lands and accordingly, sought for mutation of said lands in their name as per their alleged possession. The Village Accountant issued a notice on 03.01.1994 calling for objections to mutation pursuant to said application. Thereafter, the Revenue Inspector in his order in the nature of clarification, included all the hissas of Sy. Nos.55 and 79 i.e., Sy. Nos.55/1, 55/2, 55/3, 79/1, 79/2, 79/3, 79/4 and -5- 79/5, based on Form No.10 of settlement survey and effected mutation of same by Order No.96 dated 06.02.1995 in the name of Sanganagouda. Admittedly, prior to the said mutation order, the aforesaid lands were standing in the name of different persons and not in the name of Sanganagouda.
3. The original owners of the aforesaid lands including respondents 4 and 5 herein, in whose name mutation entries stood prior to the mutation order dated 06.02.1995, after coming to know of the same, gave representation to the Assistant Commissioner, Yadgir, on 25.10.2003 seeking rectification of the entries, which were made by removing their name from the mutation register. The said complaint was considered as appeal under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and proceeding was initiated in case No.REV/ROR/MUT/62/2003-04 wherein, the Assistant Commissioner of Yadgir District, observed that the mutation order dated 06.02.1995 issued by the -6- Revenue Inspector is contrary to the provisions of the Act and there was no conformity between From No.10 of settlement survey and recitals of mutation order and Sanganagouda did not have any semblance of right or title over the aforesaid lands. The Assistant Commissioner further observed that merely on the basis of the alleged possession of Sanganagouda and Form No.10 clandestinely secured in his name, mutation order had been passed and same was held to be erroneous. Accordingly, the Assistant Commissioner by order dated 24.08.2004, set aside the mutation order dated 06.02.1995 and directed restoration of the land to its original owners. Being aggrieved by the same, Sanganagouda sought revision of the said order by filing revision petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Yadgiri, in Revision Petition No.70/2004-05.
4. During the pendency of the said proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner, Sanganagouda died and his legal representatives pursued the revision petition. Deputy Commissioner after hearing the revision petitioners -7- therein (petitioners herein) and respondents therein (respondents 4 to 6 herein and another), who are original land owners and in whose name entries stood in the revenue records prior to mutation order dated 06.02.1995 effected in the name of Sanganagouda, and on re- appreciation of the material on record, held that the order of the Assistant Commissioner in restoring the mutation entries in favour of respondents in the said proceedings is just and proper and accordingly, dismissed the said revision petition by order dated 12/04/2012. Being aggrieved by the concurrent finding of both the revenue Courts below, namely, the Assistant Commissioner as well as the Deputy Commissioner, the present writ petition is filed by the legal representatives of the deceased Sanganagouda.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for petitioners, learned Addl. Government Advocate, Sri Shivakumar R. Tengli, appearing on behalf of respondents -8- 1 to 3 and learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and
5. On going through the material available on record, it is clearly seen that the petition filed by petitioners 1 to 5 is without any basis. Petitioners rely upon the mutation order dated 06.02.1995 effected in favour of Sanganagouda, which is held to be erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the Act by both the revenue Courts below. There appears to be an attempt on the part of petitioners to usurp the land of respondents 4 to 6, which was fallow land as the original owners had gone out of Yadgir District in search of their livelihood. Therefore, the order of the Assistant Commissioner, which is confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner in restoring the mutation entries in the name of original owners appears to be just and proper. In the light of the aforesaid finding, this Court feel that the attempt of petitioners herein in trying to create illegal right and title in their favour over aforesaid lands cannot be allowed to go unpunished.
-9-
Hence, this writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.50,000/-, which is payable at the rate of Rs.10,000/- by each of the petitioners. Out of the cost of Rs.50,000/-, Rs.10,000/- each shall be paid to respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 and balance Rs.20,000/- shall be appropriated to the Registry.
Sd/-
JUDGE sma