Shah Ismail Khadri vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 July, 2008

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shah Ismail Khadri vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 July, 2008

Bench: N.K.Patil

1

{N THE H¥GH COURT GF KARNATAKA
C¥RCU!T BENCH AT GULBARGA

DATED TH¥S THE 21$? DAY OF' JULY 2003
BEFORE.
THE HON'BLE MR. JUST¥CE N.K. PATIL

BETWEEN

SHAH iSMAt£. KHADW

SK.) SHAH ABDUL KHADER KHAQRI,
55 YRS, RIG H.NQ.8>--'!0-51,

BEE-iiND G N {.3 SCHOOL,

BHIJAR.

(BY SRl.!<ALEEMULLA SHARIFF, A§3VC§§3$TE)  3
Am};    2

2 THE STﬁ.TEQF 'r€ARNftfIA_KA__ 
BYlTS:SECRET~AVRY§ ; _  _
HQUSi1'4_G s._:;:2:;sA;m§--.jvz.=Lc::?1a.aE:g:'r--mepaamewr,
Mssuwtws, ~    __
BANGALORE-1,

2 THE DEPUT'ff3GMMt$$!GNEﬁ"' 
31332 uzsraucr;-» ., _
 Bi§_Zv2AR.E___   ..... 

 . ':*;4..s:=,1*.ns.a¢€:ss;.m§'52~.
  Vagpaa m,u:<, %a{m;R.

 "  _ 4 'e::rf{~Mu&ed!pA{.:=¢ouNc:L

Ema, B\'~!TS'.ADMlNl8TRATQR.

4: . ,_ 5" V  THE comlssaomea

--. ' .ABlDAR mean DEVELQPMENT AUTHORUY,
V. s;::.=:-.~g:::.

 RESPQNDENTS

' {av SR§:S'S.KUMMAN, ADDL, acvr A£}V,)

ﬂiiri'

,.§ ' j, _Q 'PE:riT:oNééé 

(T9

wan' marmow NO. 37729 of 2.002 1 La.3§__9L1% I; "   

xxgx



THLS WRVF PETWQN IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AM!) 22? OF
THE CONSTi'¥'UTiGN OF INERA, PRAWNG TO QUASH VEDE ANXE M DT.
13.1.2092 BY R4 AND ANDIL N DTW 1612002 BY R3 AS: ILLEGAL, AND GRANT
STAY WDE ANX. M AND N AND ALL FURTHER FRGCEEDINGS.

was wen' PET%?!C}N comma ow E-"GR HEARM mes em, 

scum was we FO£.L{)WiNG;
O R D E R

The petitioner being aggrieved __by,__the u reseiuﬁon of the fourﬁm respondent Aﬂrréjinietretef :

Annexure M dated 10%' Januefy_ '2£)02A."and impugned ietter of the Mun:iei.pa£itt;"'-are'1_A.eh:e;zure'N'-Adaied 16*" January 2002 in No.5003 3eeeee7_'eﬁ'Annexure M, addraeed te ---- Deputy Cemmissioper"e;e.: " jurisdiction by issuing a ' h

2. The efiexfaneéa eetitiener in the instant wet ;:é'eii:tierx1HeAf"'£ieving the ebsoiute owner of hand beeVr§e:gV._$y;measuring 08 aerm 25 guntas situate _Gul%er%neveii', Eider Distrﬁct, had eeught for cemrersien VeaidV"*'I¢and free": agricuiturei ts non agrieuftured '"~",'«,_':pu_;fpe:;e"ehd the same w e granted as per the efder ' 8:" December 1 rad anoﬁxer exfent at' 04 acres 3 20 guntas wee aieo converted %nte nan agricuiturai purpcee by an order dated 8%' April 1982 by jurisdictienai eornpetent eutherity. Aceerdingiy, petif§e:§§§'..j:__Vf3' _ has ﬁied the applicetien fer sanction <_>_f...3:h__e iay"eu{'_':v;§'!enV'*_ u befere the Town Planning Auihority.

Authority, in tum, has sancﬁoner$--fﬁe_ |ay' 'e;;_t V;>¥e>n in;'iwe phases subject to cenditien.i§.hat,«..en of' O1---ec.r:§e of Sand is to be reserved fer §n which half an CMC en reeeenabie heif acre is te be prevideei" _rneVih£eining tewn park. The said at the time of eanctionéigig the I4eyoA;r£';§lari' and amerdingiy, petitiener has vlexeeuteé agreement between with the CMC on 27th .;'.t,::'i5,g_'|A extract of ﬁne proceedings before the P¥e?rir}if§.g ":?§u*£?1ority dated 2" Febmary 1981 in piéretiajnee of the agreement executed are preduced as __i_-'&'r"$ne';:ur® 8 to E. Thereafter, petiticzner has handed over 'made and epen specm as per the approved leyeut 4 plan tn the extents shown therein tn the Assistant Executive Engineer, CMC, Bidar on 5*" August 1982'=.'_ and a copy cf the same is preduced as Annexure g the case sf petitioner that, the City Munit.:ipai_ T' 1 'V Bidet neither maintained the park of the remaining extent of tend aehes beenhhegreecij said land was g§ven an reesonaV_t:$i_f:"e.V',v:_pr.i;f5e other basic amenities incitining :e;3;ace :5 the iayout. When thimg; snide.' Vehock and surprise ef the cf the fourth respondent; " jg' . ..ne§ce and withcut efferding any jﬁeﬁﬁener, has prcceeded and passed the""}m_pug:"{--:ef:i-v_»'reeoiution dated 10"' January i-\nnexure'V'¥v'i""end issued the direcﬁon to the M repandegit take passeeeion of the mud for x""V':a§}ow%n§;«.._Vthe land tn the District lnformaﬁen and Bider, The said reseiution passed is etgbeequént tn the ccmmunicaﬁon issued by reependents V 3 and hence, the same is one math' out jurisdicﬁnn 6 pesssession m' the third raspandent -- City Municipai Councii, Bidar. However, the third respondent instead of utiiizing ﬁne said iand fur the purpcae for which V. been earmarked in the Say out pian, has M gurssdictsan and me Administrator of mgkgqgrg hrésnzmené City Municipal Ceuncii has _;:-a_sse4c}a_""'the ' prepesing that, half portion cf the' his the District Info{mationV;:*«:hv1x§1d' Siam. Consequenﬁy, the-zf_A'--h!_!.w~:ic:i';:>::a:!.. issued a communicaﬁuq the Deputy the Tahsiidar, Bidar to tahe éﬁgerv hhof the fend immediateiy. The impugneﬂ by the fourth respendent "ihaV }5.{§ministratorV'Eénti"fhe cammunication issued by the Munhici-pa': .¢::V'*~(}carhm§..~.ssioner are passed wiﬁwout any j_usis<:§it:tion.__~'a§1ki;v' {he same are highiy unssustainabie and h ' rsémé ta be set aside at the threshold stsezf. *4'; Withcut going into furﬁwer merits and demarits of J ithiaécase, it wank'! sufﬁce for this Csurt to set aside me 8 and to take appmpdate decisien in accordance with few and the reievant provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act and Rulas, after affording reas0nab!.e__ ogoorfunity to petitioner and dispose of '~the'_'_' ~ iv A % 1 'V same, as expeditiously as possibfe. Vb BMV*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court