Karnataka High Court
Sri B N Krishna Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 November, 2017
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
Bench: S.N.Satyanarayana
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA
WRIT PETITION NOS.52216/2017
& 52325-337/2017(LR-RES)
BETWEEN
SRI B.N. KRISHNA PRASAD,
S/O.LATE B.N.PRASAD,
RESIDING AT NO.005,
RAVIKIRAN APARTMENTS, NO.80,
4TH MAIN ROAD, MALLESWARAM,
BENGALURU-560003.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT.M, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL,
HOSKOTE TALUK,
HOSKOTE,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
3. SRI KESHAVARAO (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
3(a) SMT.T.S.AMBUJAKSHI,
MAJOR, W/O LATE KESHAVARAO,
-2-
3(b) SRI K ANANDRAO,
MAJOR, S/O LATE KESHAVARAO,
4. SRI S RAMA RAO(SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
4(a) SMT. SUKHALATHA, MAJOR,
W/O LATE RAMARAO,
4(b) SRI S R RAMESH,
MAJOR, S/O LATE RAMARAO,
4(c) SRI S R NAGENDRA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE RAMARAO,
4(d) SRI S R SRIVATHSA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE RAMARAO,
5. B. VENKATARAMANAPPA,
MAJOR,
6. SRI KRISHNAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
6(a) SRI K. VENKATARAMANAPPA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA,
6(b) SRI K MUNIVENKATAPPA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA,
6(C) SRI K SONNAPPA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA,
7. SRI NANDEESHAPPA,
MAJOR,
8. SRI PILLAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
8(a) SRI. P. MUNIRAJU
MAJOR, S/O LATE PILLAPPA,
-3-
8(b) SRI P. NARAYANAPPA
MAJOR, S/O LATE PILLAPPA,
8(c) SRI SRINIVAS,
MAJOR, S/O LATE PILLAPPA
9. SRI MADANAGIRIYAPPA,
MAJOR,
10. VENKATAKRISHNAPPA,
(SINCE DEAD BY LR)
SRI NANJUNDAPPA
(SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
10(a) SMT NAGAMMA,
MAJOR, W/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA,
10(b) SRI SRINIVAS,
MAJOR, S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA
10(c) SRI VENKATESH,
MAJOR,,S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA,
10(d) SRI S .N. RAJA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA,
11. VENKATARAMANAPPA,
MAJOR, S/O VENKATAKRISHNAPPA,
12. SRI A H RAMAIAH,
MAJOR,
13. SRI MUNIYALLAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
13(a) SMT NANJAMMA,
MAJOR, W/O LATE MUNIYELLAPPA,
13(b) SRI KRISHNAPPA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE MUNIYELLAPPA
-4-
14. MUNIYAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
14(a) SMT PILLAMMA,
MAJOR, W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA,
15. VENKATARAMANAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
15(a) SMT KAVERAMMA ,
MAJOR, W/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA,
15(b) SRI MUNIYAPPA,
MAJOR, S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA,
16. KAVERAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
16(a) SMT. YALLAMMA ,
MAJOR, W/O LATE KAVERAPPA,
16(b) SRI S .K. NAGARAJ,
MAJOR, S/O LATE KAVERAPPA,
17. VENKATAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY LRS)
17(a) SMT. SAMPANGAMMA ,
MAJOR, W/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
17(b) SRI RAJU,
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
RESPONDENT NOs.3 TO 17(b) ARE
RESIDING AT SAMETHANAHALLI,
ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI,
HOSKOTE TALUK,
BENGALURU DISTRICT-562114 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.V.GIRIKUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2)
-5-
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-L DTD
14.11.2017 PASSED BY THE R-2 LAND TRIBUNAL IN
PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO. LRF(A): 12/1365/74-75, 21/75-
76, 1067, 1068, 1069, 1070, 1071, 1072/76-77 AND LRF (A)
51, 52, 53, 54, 55/79-80 AND LRF(A): 513/2080/74-75 AND
DIRECT R-2 TO PROCEED WITH THE MAIN CASE AFTER
SERVING NOTICE ON THE PROPOSAL LEGAL HEIRS AND ON
SUBSEQUENT TO BRINGING THEM ON RECORD AND ETC.,
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This is second round of litigation before this very Bench in a short span of three weeks. In the first round, petitioner herein approached this Court in WP.No.48394/2017 seeking certain directions to 2nd respondent - Land Tribunal, represented by its Chairman, who is none other than the Assistant Commissioner of Bengluru Rural District.
2. It is seen that proceedings in No.LRF(A)12/1365/74-75 and other connected matters are -6- pending consideration before the Land Tribunal, Hoskote Taluk with reference to certain lands, which are said to be the properties of late K.Y.Krishnaswamy Iyengar. The applications in Form No.7 which are pending before 2nd respondent - Land Tribunal are required to be decided after hearing the land owners as against the applications filed in Form No.7.
3. In the proceedings before 2nd respondent, petitioner herein was initially stated to be the sole representative of deceased Krishnaswamy Iyengar without bringing the other legal representatives of said deceased person on record. In this background, the aforesaid WP.No.48394/2012 was filed seeking certain directions to Land Tribunal among other reliefs. Incidentally, said WP.No.48394/2012 was disposed of in the presence of learned counsel appearing for State as well as applicants, who are respondent Nos.3 to 32 in said writ petition. In fact, while disposing of said writ petition, certain observations were made by this Court in its order dated 2.11.2017, which is to the effect that 2nd respondent is -7- required to allow the applications to be filed by applicants in Form No.7 before him to bring the legal representatives of late Krishnaswamy Iyengar on record as parties to said proceedings. It is seen inspite of such a specific direction being issued in earlier order, 2nd respondent having accepted the order passed by this Court and taking the same on record has proceeded to inspect the spot before considering the applications to bring the legal representatives of late Krishnaswamy Iyengar on record, which is a serious lapse on the part of 2nd respondent. Hence, the order passed by 2nd respondent in conducting spot inspection in the absence of all land owners coming on record necessitated, the present writ petition being filed by the petitioner in earlier round of litigation.
4. When this matter came up for consideration, this Court felt that, what is required to be considered in this writ petition is, the inaction on the part of 2nd respondent in not complying with the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 2.11.2017. Hence, 2nd respondent - Chairman -8- of Land Tribunal, Hoskote, was called upon to be present before the Court and to explain as to why he did not comply with the direction issued by this Court, referred to supra. In response to such a direction, an affidavit which is filed by the Chairman of Land Tribunal, Hoskote, is taken on record. The said affidavit is nothing but a self-serving attempt on the part of the officer to get over the mistake committed by him in not complying with the directions issued by this Court in its earlier order.
5. In fact, this Court feel that the 2nd respondent, Chairman of Land Tribunal is overreaching his office and behaving in such a manner that he is having scant respect to the directions issued by this Court, which per se amounts to contempt. Hence, this Court in the fact situation find that it is better to place on record the conduct of 2nd respondent, Chairman of Land Tribunal in ignoring the earlier order passed by this Court and trying to behave autocratically, which is inappropriate and improper. Accordingly, the same is placed on record and further, it is made clear that in -9- future, if any attempt is made to deal with the matter in the aforesaid proceedings in an arbitrary manner, this Court will be left with no other option but to initiate appropriate proceedings for contempt.
6. Accordingly, with aforesaid serious implication of reprimanding for not complying with the order passed by this Court in the earlier round, one more opportunity is given to him to defer all further proceedings regarding inspection until all the parties to proceedings before him are brought on record. Thereafter, when once all the parties are brought on record, it is open to Chairman of Land Tribunal - Assistant Commissioner to take appropriate decision regarding inspection of property in the presence of landlords or their authorized representatives to consider the application in Form No.7. Thereafter, to dispose of the matter in accordance with law after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the parties before him.
- 10 -
With the aforesaid observations and directions, these writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE nd/-