Karnataka High Court
Siddappa S/O Tippanna Allolli And Ors vs The Deputy Commissioner And Ors on 11 March, 2024
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084
WP No. 205965 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 205965 OF 2016 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
1. SIDDAPPA S/O TIPPANNA ALLOLLI,
AGE:60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TAMBA, TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
2. BASAPPA S/O TIPPANNA ALLOLLI,
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TAMBA, TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
3. JETTEPPA S/O TIPPANNA ALLOLLI,
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA, TQ:INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI DEEPAK V. BARAD, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by SHILPA R AND:
TENIHALLI
Location: High 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Court Of VIJAYAPURA-586101.
Karnataka
2. THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANT TO DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER
AND IN-CHARGE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND
RECORDS VIJAYAPURA-586101.
3. BHIMANNA S/O TIPPANNA ALLOLLI
AGE: 79 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA, TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
4. RAMANNA S/O TIPPANNA ALLOLLI
(SINCE DECEASED)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084
WP No. 205965 of 2016
R3 & R5 ARE LRs.,
5. MARNINGAPPA S/O TIPPANNA ALLOLLI
AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA, TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
6. SHANTMALLAPPA S/O REVANSIDDAPPA BYAKOD
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA, TQ:INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
7. SANJEEVKUMAR S/O BHIMSINGH CHAVAN
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA, TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
8. AHMED S/O MASIMSAB UJANI
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA, TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
9. BADESAB S/O NABISAB NADAF
AGE: YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE
R/O TAMBA TQ: INDI DIST: VIJAYAPUR
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAYA T. R, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI SHIVASHANKAR H. MANNUR, ADVOCATE
FOR R3 AND R5;
V/O DATED 1/2/2019 R3, R5 ARE LRs., OF DECEASED R4;
R6 TO R9 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI THEREBY QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED
28.03.2016 IN NO. RVN / PHS / APL / 07 / 2015-16 VIDE
ANNEXURE-F AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI THEREBY
QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 7.9.2011 PASSED BY
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084
WP No. 205965 of 2016
RESPONDENT NO.2 IN NO. PHS / APL / SR NO.96/2007-18
VIDE ANNEXURE-E.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri Deepak V. Barad, learned High Court Government Pleader Smt.Maya T. R. for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel Sri Shivashankar H. Manur for respondent Nos.3 and 5.
2. This writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
"i) To issue a writ of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned order passed by the respondent No.1 dated 28.03.2016 in No.RVN/PHS/APL/07/2015-16 vide Annexure-F.
ii) Issue a writ of certiorari thereby quashing the order dated 7.9.2011 passed by respondent No.2 in No.PHS/APL/SR No.96/2007-18 vide Annexure-E.
iii) Pass any appropriate order, direction or writ as deemed fit by this Court under the facts and -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084 WP No. 205965 of 2016 circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."
3. Annexure-E came to be passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Vijayapur (for short 'DDLR') in file No.PHS/APL/SR No.96/2007-08 dated 07.09.2011, whereby, in respect of land in Survey No.16 of Tamba village, Indi taluka, the revenue entries are ordered to be cancelled and a fresh notice is to be issued with regard to the land measuring 11 acres 19 guntas and pass appropriate orders.
4. Annexure-E was challenged before the Deputy Commissioner, Vijayapur in a revision petition. The learned Deputy Commissioner after notifying the parties came to the conclusion that the order passed by the DDLR is just and proper as there was no proper application of mind by the authorities while entering the name of the petitioners herein in respect of the land in Survey No.16 of Tamba village, Indi taluka and upheld the order passed by the DDLR while dismissing the revision petition. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084 WP No. 205965 of 2016
5. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition vehemently contended that the DDLR was incompetent to pass the order at Annexure-E and the same has not been properly considered by the Deputy Commissioner while passing the order at Annexure-F and sought for quashing the same.
7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 5 support the impugned order.
8. Having heard the parties in detail, this Court has meticulously perused the materials on record.
9. On such perusal of the materials on record, it is crystal clear that based on the application given by Bhimanna, who is respondent No.3 in the present writ -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084 WP No. 205965 of 2016 petition, the DDLR issued notice to the writ petitioners and others.
10. Despite service of notice, the writ petitioners and others did not choose to appear before the DDLR. Under such circumstances, the DDLR perused the materials on record and also the application filed by respondent No.3 herein and noted that before entering the name of the petitioners in the revenue records, there was no proper notification and directed that the revenue entries in respect of the land in Survey No.16 of Tamba village, Indi taluka is to be cancelled after notifying all concerned, fresh enquiry should be held and proper orders have to be passed with regard to entering the names of the proper persons in the revenue records.
11. The legality of the said order was challenged before the Deputy Commissioner by the writ petitioners. The learned Deputy Commissioner after noting the relevant aspects of the matter has rightly dismissed the revision petition.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084 WP No. 205965 of 2016
12. Having heard the parties in detail and perusing the records, no injustice has been caused to the writ petitioners, inasmuch as, what has been ordered by the DDLR was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner to hold a fresh enquiry with regard to the revenue entries in respect of land in Survey No.16 of Tamba village, Indi taluka. The said order is inconsonance with the procedure laid down under the provisions of Section 49(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.
13. Therefore, there is no merit in the grounds urged. Further, it is always open for the writ petitioners to participate in the fresh enquiry and establish their case in accordance with law.
14. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
ORDER
a) The writ petition is meritless and hereby dismissed.-8-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2084 WP No. 205965 of 2016
b) However, as per the order passed by the DDLR at Annexure-E, the parties shall be notified in writing for fresh enquiry by affording them reasonable opportunities and pass appropriate orders within six months from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE SRT CT:SI List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33