Karnataka High Court
Smt. Shivakka W/O Channappa Alias ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 February, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4244
WP No. 101843 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 101843 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHIVAKKA W/O CHANNAPPA ALIAS
CHANNABASAPPA BENTUR
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. 11 CROSS, NAVANAGAR,
HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580025
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI S R HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY SECRETARY TO THE
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
SIRSI SUB DIVISION
AT SIRSI -581401
SUJATA DIST: UTTARA KANNADA
SUBHASH
PAMMAR 3. THE TAHASILDAR
MUNDAGOD, TQ: MUNDAGOD
Digitally signed DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581349
by SUJATA
SUBHASH ...RESPONDENTS
PAMMAR
Date: 2024.02.28
(BY SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP.)
03:04:59 -0800
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2
IN BHUSU/79AB/VIVA/13/2017-18 DATED 30-08-2017 VIDE
ANNEXURE-D, AND ETC.,.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4244
WP No. 101843 of 2022
ORDER
Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 3.
2. The petitioner claims to have purchased the land bearing Sy.No.128/1, measuring 04 acres, situated at Mynalli village in Mundagod taluk of Uttara Kannada district, from one Subbanna @ Sabanna Kalal, through a registered sale deed dated 09.02.2017. The 2nd respondent initiated proceedings under section 83 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act ('the Act' for short) stating that purchase of land by the petitioner was in violation of section 79A of the Act. The 2nd respondent after issuing notice to the petitioner, passed the impugned order declaring that the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner is null and void and forfeited the land with the Government free from all encumbrances. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that in view of omission of section 79A of the Act, and the lawful possession having not been taken, the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent stands abated.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4244 WP No. 101843 of 2022
4. Learned HCGP submits that the impugned order was passed before omission of section 79A of the Act. He further submits that the name of the Government is mutated in the revenue records in pursuance of the order passed by respondent No.2 and therefore possession having been taken, the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent does not stand abated.
5. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
6. As of today, the lawful possession of the subject land has not been taken by the Government in light of the order passed by respondent No.2. The State Government by Act No.56/2020 omitted Section 79A, 79B and 79C of the Act. Section 12 of the Act, 2020 deals with savings and it states that notwithstanding the omission of Sections 79A, 79B and 79C w.e.f. 1st day of March, 1974, all cases finally disposed of before promulgation of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 shall remain unaffected. Sub- Section (2) of section 12 the Act states that all cases pending in -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4244 WP No. 101843 of 2022 any Court pertaining to Section 79A, 79B and 79C shall hereby stand abated.
7. Though the order was passed by the 2nd respondent, before section 79A of the Act was omitted, however, the respondents have not placed on record to establish that lawful possession of the subject land was taken before omission of section 79A of the Act. The lawful possession of the subject land having not been taken, the order passed by the 2nd respondent has not resulted in conclusion of the proceedings finally. Therefore, the lawful possession of the subject land having not been taken by the government, the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent stands abated. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) Accordingly the writ petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned order dated 30.08.2017, passed by the 2nd respondent at Annexure-D is hereby quashed.
iii) Petitioner is at liberty to submit an application with the 3rd respondent for substituting the name of the petitioner in -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4244 WP No. 101843 of 2022 place of the Government and if such an application is filed, the 3rd respondent to consider the same, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE MRK/CT:CNB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34