Karnataka High Court
Shri Mahesha vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 April, 2023
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
WP No. 4088 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 4088 OF 2023 (LR)
BETWEEN:
SHRI MAHESHA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
S/O LATE NINGEGOWDA
ARAVATTIGEKOPPALU VILLAGE
BANNUR HOBLI
T NARASIPURA TALUK
RANGASAMUDRA, MYSORE-571101.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. SUMA KEDILAYA, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560001
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed
PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION
by
MARIGANGAIAH
PANDAVAPURA- 571434.
PREMAKUMARI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 3. THE TAHSILDAR
KARNATAKA
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK AND
DISTRICT 571438.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V SESHU, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING
ANNEXURE-E THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R2, DATED
20.01.2017 IN BHUSUDHARANE, PARISHILANA 83/2015.16.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
-2-
WP No. 4088 of 2023
ORDER
Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. Though the matter is listed for Preliminary Hearing, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. Heard the learned counsel Smt.Suma Kedilaya for petitioner through video conference and learned High Court Government Pleader Sri.V.Seshu for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perused the writ petition papers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the correctness and legality of Annexure-E, order dated 20.01.2017 in Proceedings No.¨sÀƸÀÄ:¥Àj²Ã®£É:83/15-16 forfeiting the land in Sy.No.102/2 to an extent of 1 acre 11 guntas of Gendehosahalli Village, Arakere Hobli, Srirangapatna Taluk -3- WP No. 4088 of 2023 for violation of Section 79A and Section 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short 1961 Act).
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that petitioner had no opportunity of participating in the proceedings initiated by second respondent- Assistant Commissioner under Section 79A and Section 79B of 1961 Act, since notice to the petitioner was not served. Learned counsel would invite attention of this Court to the impugned order wherein it is noted that notice issued to the petitioner through Registered Post Acknowledgement Due (RPAD) is returned "unserved". As the impugned order dated 20.01.2017 forfeiting the land of the petitioner for violation of Section 79A and Section 79B of 1961 Act is in total violation of principles of natural justice, learned counsel for the petitioner would pray for an opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the proceedings.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that notice was issued to the petitioner to the address stated in the sale deed. Hence, -4- WP No. 4088 of 2023 he submits that it cannot be said that petitioner was not issued with notice.
7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am of the view that petitioner would be entitled for an opportunity to participate in the proceedings before the second respondent-Assistant Commissioner.
8. A perusal of the impugned order dated 20.01.2017 (Annexure-E) would indicate that notice issued to the petitioner through RPAD is returned. As the notice issued to petitioner is returned "unserved" and as the second respondent-Assistant Commissioner has not taken any further steps to serve notice on the petitioner, petitioner had no opportunity to participate in the proceedings. As the impugned order is without service of notice, the same is in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed. -5- WP No. 4088 of 2023
(ii) Impugned order dated 20.01.2017 in Proceedings No.¨sÀƸÀÄ:¥Àj²Ã®£É:83/15-16 (Annexure-E) is set aside and remitted back to the second respondent for fresh consideration, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner.
(iii) Petitioner shall appear before the second respondent on 24.05.2023 at 03.00 p.m., without expecting any notice.
(iv) The second respondent shall conclude the proceedings within three months from the date of appearance of the parties, as stated above.
SD/-
JUDGE NC CT:bms: List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34