Karnataka High Court
Ashok Puttu Gavnkar vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 June, 2023
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
WP No. 104331 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 104331 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
ASHOK PUTTU GAONKAR,
AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. POST. HARWAD, TQ. ANKOLA,
DIST. KARWAR-581316.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S V YAJI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
R/BY REVENUE SECRETARY,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
Digitally KUMTA SUB-DIVISION,
signed by KUMTA, DIST. KARWAR-581332.
RAKESH S
RAKESH
HARIHAR ... RESPONDENTS
S Location: (BY SRI. VINAYAK S. KULKARNI, AGA)
HARIHAR Dharwad
Date:
2023.06.24
11:45:46 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
+0530 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.2 ASSITANT COMMISSIONER KUMTA DATED 22/07/2010 IN
NO.BHU.SU/AP/VIVA/1/2010-11 VIDE ANNEXURE-C TO THE WRIT
PETITION AND CONSIQUENTLY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND HIS
SUBBORDINATS MAY BE DIRECTED BY AN ORDER OF MADAMUS TO
RECORD THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE RTC IN RESPECT OF
THE LAND MEASURING SY.NO.150/2PÀ MEASURING 0-2-0 OF
HARWADA VILLAGE IN ANKOLA TALUKA.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
-2-
WP No. 104331 of 2022
ORDER
1. The petitioner, who had purchased the land bearing Sy. No.33/4 measuring 2 guntas situated at Belakeri Hobli, Harawada Village, Ankola Taluk has preferred this writ petition assailing the order at Annexure
- C dated 22.07.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent - Assistant Commissioner in proceedings bearing No.BHU . SU / AP / VIVA / 1 / 2010-11 in exercise of his powers under Section 83 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act of 1961").
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioner had purchased the land in question under a registered sale deed dated 18.11.2009 from one Smt.Bageerati W/o. Bikaro Naik for a valid sale consideration. On the ground that the said sale deed was executed in violation of Section 79A of the Act of 1961, the Assistant Commissioner had initiated proceedings in exercise of his powers under Section 83 of the Act of 1961 and had passed the impugned order declaring the sale as -3- WP No. 104331 of 2022 null and void and had directed forfeiture of the land in question in favour of the State. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had no proper opportunity before the Assistant Commissioner to produce necessary documents. He also submits that the Assistant Commissioner had not taken the aggregate income of the petitioner, which is required under Section 79A of the Act of 1961. He submits that after the Karnataka Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 2020 (for short, 'the Amendment Act of 2020) coming into force, Section 79A, 79B and 79C stands omitted from the statute and therefore the order requires to be quashed.
5. Per contra, learned AGA has argued in support of the impugned order and submits that, though sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner, he had not produced necessary documents. He submits that, since the order impugned has attained finality, the Amendment Act -4- WP No. 104331 of 2022 of 2020 will not be applicable to the facts of this case. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments addressed by both parties and also perused the material on record.
7. A reading of the impugned order would go to show that, the Assistant Commissioner has come to the conclusion that the annual income of the petitioner is more than Rs.2 lakhs on the basis of the income tax return filed by the petitioner. The requirement under Section 79-A (2) is that the Assistant Commissioner has to take the aggregate of 5 consecutive years, preceding the date of sale, to arrive at an average annual income and prima facie it appears that such an exercise is not done in the present case. In addition to the same, it appears that the petitioner was not given proper opportunity before the Assistant Commissioner to putforth his case and also place necessary documents. It is not in dispute that after coming into force the Amendment Act of 2020, Section -5- WP No. 104331 of 2022 79A, 79B and 79C has been omitted from the principal Act with effect from 01.03.1974. Under these circumstances, there would be no purpose in remitting the matter to the Assistant Commissioner. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER Writ petition is allowed. The impugned order at Annexure-C dated 22.07.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent, is quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Rsh & Kgk/Ct:Bck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61