Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Sunanda Balraj @ vs The Asst. Commissioner on 16 January, 2024

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                                  -1-
                                                           NC: 2024:KHC:1954
                                                        WP No. 23719 of 2023




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                           DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

                                             BEFORE
                               THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 23719 OF 2023 (LR)

                      BETWEEN:

                      1.   SMT. SUNANDA BALRAJ @
                           MARY RITA SUNANDA
                           W/O LATE A BALARAJ,
                           AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,

                      2.   SMT ARCHANA NAIDU
                           D/O LATE A BALARAJ,
                           AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

                      3.   SRI ANILBALARAJ
                           S/O LATE A BALARAJ,
                           AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

Digitally signed by   4.   SRI ABHISHEK BALARAJ
DHARMALINGAM
Location: HIGH             S/O LATE A BALARAJ,
COURT OF                   AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
KARNATAKA
                           REPRESENTED BY HIS GENERAL
                           POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
                           SMT MARY RITA SUNANDA @
                           SUNANDABALARAJ
                           ALL ARE R/A RESIDING AT
                           NO 3(11/2) LEWIS ROAD,
                           COOKES TOWN,
                           BENGALURU 560005
                                                               ...PETITIONERS
                      (BY SRI. NAVEEN G S., ADVOCATE)
                              -2-
                                           NC: 2024:KHC:1954
                                      WP No. 23719 of 2023




AND:

1.   THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
     MANDYA SUBDIVISION,
     PES COLLEGE CAMPUS,
     MANDYA 571401
     KARNATAKA

2.   THE THASILDAR
     MADDUR TALUK,
     MANDYA DISTRICT-571401
                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH., AGA)

       THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DTD 13.09.2010 N LRF.NO.33/2009-10 PASSED BY THE
R1 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND DIRECT THE R2 TO
RESTORE     THE NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS AS KATHEDARS
BY EFFECTING THE MUTATION AS THE LEGAL HEIRS OF
DECEASED A BALARAJ AND ETC.,

       THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                           ORDER

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

This is a proceeding initiated under Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. One Sri A.Balaraj, husband of first petitioner and father of petitioners No.2 to -3- NC: 2024:KHC:1954 WP No. 23719 of 2023 4, purchased 1 acre and 33 guntas of land in Sy.No.26/3 of, 1 acre and 33 guntas of land in Sy.No.26/3C and 20 guntas of land in B.Hosahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, Kadathnamale Village, Hesarghatta Hobli, under a registered sale deed dated 17.09.2007. Proceedings were initiated by the competent authority/Assistant Commissioner in proceedings bearing No.LRF 33/2009-10 for contravention of the provisions of the said Act. An order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner on 13.09.2010 holding that the sale was in contravention of the provisions contained in Sections 79A and 79B of the Act. The petitioners herein filed an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.750/2012. However, by order dated 11.02.2016 the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not aware of the fact that the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Nevertheless, the -4- NC: 2024:KHC:1954 WP No. 23719 of 2023 petitioners filed a review petition in Misc.Petn. No.39/2022 before the Tribunal and the same is pending consideration.

3. This court had several occasions to consider such cases where writ petitions are filed long after the provisions contained in Sections 79A, 79B and 79C were omitted from the statute book in terms of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 2020. It is the consistent opinion of this Court that if at any rate the Assistant Commissioner, after forfeiting the land has not disposed of the same in accordance with law then the benefit of the saving clause contained in Section 12 of the amending act is required to be given to such petitioners. The Assistant Commissioner is therefore required to ascertain, whether the declared excess lands or forfeited lands still remain with the State Government or has been granted to third parties. If the lands have been granted to third party, then sub-section(1) of Section 12 of the amending Act will apply to say that the proceedings have reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-section (2) of Section -5- NC: 2024:KHC:1954 WP No. 23719 of 2023 12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant Commissioner.

4. For the reasons stated above, this Court proceeds to pass the following;

:ORDER:

(i) The writ petition stands allowed.
(ii) The impugned orders dated 13.09.2010 passed by respondent No.1-Assistant Commissioner in LRF 33/2009-10 and the order dated 11.02.2016 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.750/2012 are hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioners including the consequences of the subsequent amendment brought to the provisions of -6- NC: 2024:KHC:1954 WP No. 23719 of 2023 Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.
(iv) The petitioners shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 12.02.2024 without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

(v) If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the impugned order dated 13.09.2010, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioners.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE JT/-

CT: JL