Karnataka High Court
Smt Sumangala Kom Basappa Doddamni vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 February, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4153
WP No. 104485 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. 104485 OF 2022 (SCST)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT SUMANGALA KOM BASAPPA DODDAMNI
AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD
R/O MYAGERI BUILDING SHIVAGIRI
DHARWAD-580003
2. SMT. NEELAVVA KOM NAGAPPA
SOMAKKALAVAR SINCE DEAD LRS
3. SRI MALATESH NAGAPPA SOMAKKALAVAR
AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD
R/O KOPPAD KERI, DHARWAD-580008
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. KAVITA P HOSALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SUJATA 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
SUBHASH REP. BY SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT
PAMMAR M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001
Digitally signed 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD
by SUJATA DHARWAD-580001
SUBHASH
PAMMAR
Date: 2024.02.27 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
23:38:13 -0800
DHARWAD-580001
4. IRAYYA ESHWARAYYA KARISIDHIMATH
AGE. 85 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED OFFICER
R/O SHIVANAND NAGAR,
HOSAYELLAPUR ROAD, DHARWAD 580001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.HANAMANTHARAYA LAGALI, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
R4 SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4153
WP No. 104485 of 2022
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO BE PASSED WRIT OR ORDER
IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO RESTORE THE LAND IN
QUESTION TO THE LRS OF THE ORIGINAL GRANTEE. THE ORDER
PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN PTCL.CR 2/2017-18 DATED
15-4-2021 AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 IN PTCL.CR 4
9/2021 DT.15-9-2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-E, HAVE TO BE QUASHED
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Proceedings were initiated under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as "PTCL Act" for short) stating that the land bearing Sy. No.76B/2C measuring 5 guntas situated at Saptapur Village, Dharwad, was conveyed in favour of the respondent No.4 herein in violation of Section 4 of the PTCL Act.
2. The respondent No.2 vide order dated 15.04.2021 held that the sale deed executed in favour of the respondent No.4 was without obtaining prior approval from the government, as stated under Section 4 of the PTCL Act, and accordingly, resumed the land with the government free from all encumbrances. The petitioner challenged the order passed by the respondent No.2 insofar it relates to not restoring the -3- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4153 WP No. 104485 of 2022 subject land in favour of the petitioners before this Court in W.P. No.102140/2021. This Court vide order dated 16.06.2021 dismissed the petition on the ground of non-exhaustion of alternative remedy, and liberty was granted to the petitioners to approach the appellate authority. In light of the liberty granted by this Court, the petitioner filed the appeal under Section 5A of the PTCL Act. The respondent No.1 dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed by the respondent No.2. Hence, this petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. Respondent No.4 though served with the notice has not chosen to appear in person or through his counsel. Therefore, it is implied that the order passed by the respondent No.2 has attained finality.
5. Admittedly, subject land is a granted land as defined under Section 3(b) of the PTCL Act, 1978. Section 4 of the Act deals with the prohibition of transfer of granted lands and sub Section (1) states that any transfer of granted land made either before or after commencement of this Act in contravention of the terms of the land or such land shall be null -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4153 WP No. 104485 of 2022 and void and no right, title and interest in such land shall be conveyed or be deemed to ever to have conveyed by such transfer. Section 5 deals with resumption and restitution of granted lands and sub Section (1) states that where, on application by any interested parties or information given in writing by any person or suo-motu and after such enquiry as it deems necessary, the Assistant Commissioner is satisfied that the transfer of any granted land is null and void under sub Section (1) of Section 4, he may take possession of such land or restore such land to the original grantee or his legal heir, where it is not reasonably practicable to restore the land to such grantee. Therefore, reading of the aforesaid provision indicates that the competent authority can refuse to restore the subject land only when it is reasonably impracticable to restore the land.
6. Perusal of the order indicates that no reasons are assigned as to why it is not practicable to restore the subject land in favour of the petitioners after having held that the conveyance of the subject land is in contravention of Section 4(1) of the PTCL Act. Therefore, in the absence of any reasons assigned for not restoring the subject land to the petitioner, the -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4153 WP No. 104485 of 2022 impugned order insofar it relates to vesting the land to the government is contrary to the provisions contained in Section 5 of the PTCL Act.
7. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.04.2021 passed by the respondent No.3 in PTCL . CR 2/2017-18 and the order dated 15.09.2022 passed by the respondent No.2 in PTCL . CR 4+9/2021 at Annexures - F and K, insofar it relates to vesting the subject land to the State Government are hereby quashed.
8. The respondent No.3 is hereby directed to restore the subject land bearing Sy. No.76B/2C measuring 5 guntas situated at Saptapur Village, Dharwad in favour of the petitioners within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE RSH / CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1