Karnataka High Court
Mohd Ibrahim Khazi vs The State Of Karnataka By Its Secretary ... on 8 November, 2021
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8thDAY OF NOVEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
W.P.No.6352/2006 (LR)
BETWEEN:
1. MOHD IBRAHIM KHAZI
S/O ABDUL HASAN SAB
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.
1A. SAABERA BEGUM KHAZI W/O IBRAHIM KHAZI,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEWIFE,
R/O MITTIKERI, KOPPAL,
TQ & DT: KOPPAL.
1B. MEHABOOB S/O IBRAHIM KHAZI,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC:AGRIL,
R/O MITTIKERI, KOPPAL,
TQ & DT: KOPPAL.
1C. ISMIL KHAZI S/O IBRAHIM KHAZI,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC:AGRIL,
R/O MITTIKERI, KOPPAL,
TQ & DT: KOPPAL.
1D. YUSUF KHAZI S/O IBRAHIM KHAZI,
AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC:AGRIL,
R/O MITTIKERI, KOPPAL,
TQ & DT: KOPPAL.
...PETITIONERS
(By Sri. SHARAD MAGADUM&
SRI.PRUTHVI K.S., ADVS.)
:2:
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, M S BULIDING,
BANGALORE 1.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KOPPAL.
3. THE LAND TRIBUNAL
KOPPAL, BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
.....RESPONDENTS
(By Sri.VINAYAK KULKARNI, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER DT. 16.3.06 BY R2 VIDE ANN-B SO FAR IT
RLEATES TO REJECTION OF THE FORM NO.1 FILED BY THIS
PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF LANDS BEARING S.NOS.316/B
MEASURING 9 ACRES 2 GUNTAS, 317/B MEASURING 7 ACRES
15 GUNTAS AND S.NO.318 MEASURING 11 ACRES 20
GUNTAS ALL SITUATED IN HIRESINDOGI VILLAGE. DIRECT
R3 TO GRANT OCCUPANCY RIGHTS OVER AGRIVULTURAL
LANDS BEARING S.NOS.316/B MEASURING 9 ACRES 2
GUNTAS, 317/B MEASURING 7 ACRES 15 GUNTAS AND
S.NO.318 MEASURING 11 ACRES 20 GUNTAS ALL SITUATED
IN HIRESINDOGI VILLAGE INF AVOUR OF THIS PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioner along with others had made applications seeking for registration as occupants.
:3:
2. It is not in dispute that the lands in question are Inam lands coming within the purview of Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977.
3. By an order dated 24.09.1993, the Land Tribunal had registered the petitioners herein as the occupants. This order was challenged by the rival claimants in W.P.No.41283/1993 before this Court. By an order dated 24.09.2002 this Court quashed the order passed by the Land Tribunal and remitted the matter back to the Land Tribunal, Koppal directing the Land Tribunal to club all the applications filed seeking for registration of occupants and pass fresh orders.
4. Pursuant to the said order, the matter was taken up by the Land Tribunal. On the basis of the Circular dated 30.08.1997, the file was withdrawn from the Land Tribunal and placed before the concerned Deputy Commissioner on the premise that it was the Deputy Commissioner who had jurisdiction to decide the applications.
5. The Deputy Commissioner, by the impugned order, considered the applications on merits and came to the :4: conclusion that the applicants were eligible to be registered as occupants and proceeded to reject their applications.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Deputy Commissioner did not possess jurisdiction to consider the applications filed under Section 5 of the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977. He contends that under the said Act, every person entitled to be registered as occupants, can make applications only to the Land Tribunal constituted under the Land Reforms Act and if such an application is made, the law mandates that the said application should be disposed of by the Tribunal as if it was the application made under the Land Reforms Act. He submitted that since admittedly the lands in question came within the purview of Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, which is impugned in this writ petition, is one without jurisdiction.
7. Learned Additional Government Advocate, however, sought to place reliance on the Government order dated 26.05.2001. He contended that it is only the Deputy Commissioner who was competent to adjudicate the dispute claims arising out of the provisions of Inams Act and the Land :5: Tribunal did not have any jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute relating to Inams.
8. He stated that as per the Circular dated 26.5.2001, the Government had confirmed its earlier Circular dated 30.08.1997 and 16.01.1999 and therefore it was only the Deputy Commissioner who possessed jurisdiction.
9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the records.
10. The Government issued a Circular dated 30.08.1997 which reads as under:
"CIRCULAR The Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 (Mysore Act 1 of 1955) and Mysore (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955 (Mysore Act 18 of 1955) were amended by Karnataka Inams Abolition Laws (Amendment) Act, 1979 (Karnataka Act 26 of 1979). This amendment was questioned in the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No.7230 and 2590 of 1979. In the meanwhile Mysore Act 18 of 1955 was further amended by Karnataka Act 18 of 1985.
The High Court of Karnataka in its order dated 24.4.98 (ILR 1992 Karnataka 1827) has held as follows:
"KARNATAKA INAMS ABOLITION LAWS (Amendment) ACT, 1979 (Karnataka Act No.26 of 1979)- Sections 3(9) and 4(2): MYSORE (Religious & Charitable INAMS ABOLITION :6: (Karnataka Amendment Act of 1979 including Sections 2, 3(6), 4(2) denying compensation to Inamdars beyond competence of State Legislature and colourable legislation: still born, null and void Ac, infringing Article 31(2) of Constitution of India-1984, Amendment Act superfluous."
The decision of the High Court was questioned in SlNo.3246/3247/1993 by the State Government and the Supreme Court dismissed the same in its order dated 8th August 1996.
Further the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition Nos.29071-89/1994 decided on 14.2.97, has held that the entire Karnataka Inams Abolition Laws (Amendment) Act, 1979 has been declared as invalid without confining to any one or either of the Act namely Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 and the Mysore (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955. It has also directed the State Government to take steps and appoint such officer as the Deputy Commissioner within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order in default of which the Deputy Commissioner may proceed and dispose off the same in accordance with the provision of Act No.1 of 1955.
In the light of the decision of the High Court all the Deputy Commissioners of the concerned Districts are hereby directed to take necessary steps to dispose off all the pending applications filed under the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 (Mysore Act 1 of 1955) and the Mysore (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955 (Mysore Act 18 of 1955) in accordance with the provisions of the said Acts, as they stood, before they were amended by the Karnataka Act 26 of 1979 and Karnataka Act 1 of 1985, pending amendment of the said Acts."
11. As be seen from the said Circular, the Circular was only in relation to the applications filed under the provisions of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, :7: 1954 and the Mysore (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955.The Circular obviously did not pertain to the applications filed under the provisions of Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977.
12. The Circular 26.05.2001, upon which learned AGA relies, reads as follows:
"With reference to your letter, cited on the subject mentioned above, I am directed to clarify that the power conferred on the Land Tribunal under the Karnataka Act 26 of 1979 to grant occupancy rights, respecting the lands vested in the Government under the provisions of the Inams Abolition Acts was struck down by the High Court in Writ Petition No.7230 and 2590/79. As a result, the Deputy Commissioner who is competent to adjudicate the disputes under the provisions of the Inam Abolition Act, will have to decide the same. Therefore, the land Tribunals have no jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes relating to the Inam Lands and all pending applications, inclusive of the matter remanded from the High Courts have to be transferred to the competent Forum and the Deputy Commissioner have to adjudicate the matters. Therefore, Government confirms the Circular No.RD 90 INM 97 dated 30-8-1997 and the Circular RD 108 INM 98 dt: 16-1-1999. Any matter relating to adjudication of claim under the provisions of the Inams Abolition Acts, even if it has been remanded to the Land Tribunal is required to be decided by the Deputy Commissioner."
13. It can be seen from the said Circular also, the Government was dealing with the amendment made to the Inams Act under the Karnataka Act 26 of 1979. It cannot be in dispute that the Amendment Act 26 of 1979 does not relate :8: to Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act. It is therefore clear that neither the Circular dated 30.08.1977 nor the circular dated 26.05.2001 would have any bearing on the applications filed under the provisions of the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977.
14. Section 11 of the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977 reads as under:
"11. Procedure for registration as an occupant.- (1) Every person entitled to be registered as an occupant under this Act shall make an application to the Tribunal constituted under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. Such application shall be disposed of by the tribunal as if it is an application made under the said Act.
(2)(a) From every decision or order passed by the Tribunal under this Act after the commencement of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1986, a appeal shall lie to the Appellate Authority, and the Appellate Authority shall send a copy of every order passed by it to the Tahasildar, the Secretary of the Tribunal and the parties concerned;
(b) The provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 applicable to enquiries, proceedings and conduct of business of Appellate Authority under the said Act including the provision of Section 121-! thereof shall mutatis mutandis apply to enquiries, proceedings and conduct of business of the Appellate Authority under this Act."
15. As can be seen from the above, every person entitled to be registered as occupant under the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977 is required to make an application only to :9: the Tribunal constituted under the Land Reforms Act and the said application is required to be disposed off by the Tribunal as if it is an application made under the Land Reforms Act. In the light of clear conferment of jurisdiction on the Land Tribunal constituted under the Land Reforms Act, 1961 alone, the Deputy Commissioner had no jurisdiction to decide Form No.1 filed by the petitioner.
16. The impugned order cannot therefore be sustained and the same is quashed. The matter is remitted to the jurisdictional Land Tribunal to consider the application of the petitioners who alone have challenged rejection of their Form No.1. The Land Tribunal shall consider only the application of the petitioners within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGK