Karnataka High Court
Sri B Nagaraja vs State Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2020
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO.7809/2020 (LB-TAX)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NOs.7874/2020 (LB-RES), 7898/2020
(LB-TAX), 7912/2020 (LB-RES), 7916/2020 (LB-RES),
7957/2020 (LB-RES), 7962/2020 (LB-TAX),
7966/2020 (LB-TAX), 8017/2020 (LB-RES)
IN W.P NO.7809 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI B NAGARAJA
S/O SRI RAGHU RAMA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT NO 2457, I MAIN, 3RD CROSS,
VIVEKANANDA NAGAR,
BANGARPET, KOLAR 563114
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
2
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 17.02.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.
IN W.P. NO.7874 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI BHOJENDRA
S/O LATE DEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT NO.343, M V NAGAR
BANGARAPET, BEML NAGAR
KOLAR-563 115
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
3
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 05.03.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.
IN W.P. NO.7898 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SMT S VANI
W/O SRI R SRIDHAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NO.33, 1ST CROSS
CAMBRIDGE LAYOUT, ULSOOR
BENGALURU-560 008
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
4
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 05.03.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.
IN W.P. NO.7912 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI MOHAMMED ANWER
S/O SRI BABABBA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/AT NO.424, MINI IBRAHIM ROAD,
ROBERTSONPET,
KOLAR-563122
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 05.03.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.
5
IN W.P. NO. 7916 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI SUBHASH CHANDRA HOSAMANI
S/O SRI KASHINATH,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT NO.33/1,
DASARAHOSAHALLI,
BANGARAPET TALUK,
KOLAR-563162
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 05.03.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION
AND ETC.
6
IN W.P. NO.7957 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI MURALI A
S/O LATE P K APPU
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT NO.16/4, H P NAGAR
BEML NAGAR POST
KGF-563115
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 05.03.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION
AND ETC.
7
IN W.P NO. 7962 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI RAMESH K T
S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/AT NO.311, 8TH MAIN,
RAILWAY LAYOUT, I STATE,
BAVANOORNAGAR,
BENGALURU-560056
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 17.2.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-P TO THE WRIT PETITION
AND ETC.
8
IN W.P. NO.7966 OF 2020
BETWEEN
1. SRI SRIDHAR R
S/O SRI RANGANATHAN C
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
2. SMT. S VANI
W/O SRI R SRIDHAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
BOTH THE PETITIONERS ARE
R/AT NO.33, 1ST CROSS,
CAMBRIDGE LAYOUT,
ULSOOR
BENGALURU - 560 008.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
9
DTD 05.03.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION
AND ETC.
IN W.P. NO.8017 OF 2020
BETWEEN
SRI KUMAR D
S/O LATE DHARMAN A
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT NO.55, 3RD CROSS
LAKSHMI NARAYANA PURAM
SRIRAMPURA POST
BENGALURU-560 021
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT B V VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. BENGALURU ZILLA PANCHAYATH
BENGALURU DISTRICT-560009
REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
3. BAGALURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BAGALURU-562419
REP BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER/SECRETARY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K R NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI B J SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
R-3 GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO FORTHWITH ISSUE TAX PAID
RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY TAX PAID BY
THE PETITIONER AS REQUESTED IN THE REPRESENTATION
DTD 05.03.2020 AT ANNEXURE-H AND H1 TO THE WRIT
PETITION AND ETC.
10
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
COMMON ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The petitioners in these batch of writ petitions are all purchasers of individual sites in a residential layout formed by M/s.BEML (HQRS & MKTG) SC/ST Employees Welfare Association in Sy.Nos.175, 175/1, 176, 428 and 439, in all measuring 14 acres 30 guntas. The sale deeds were executed by the developer in favour of the petitioners in the year 2000 and thereafter.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the third respondent-Gram Panchayat stopped collecting the property tax in the year 2019. By pointing out to the documents produced along with the memorandum of writ petitions, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the third respondent-Gram Panchayat registered the Khatas in 11 the name of individual site owners, assessed the property to tax, collected the taxes and has issued receipts for having collected the property tax.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that receipts have been given by the third respondent-Gram Panchayat for payment of property tax till 2018-19. In the year 2019-2020, when the petitioners approached the Gram Panchayat for payment of property tax, the third respondent refused to collect property tax. It is submitted that no information was given to the petitioners as to why the property tax is not being collected. Consequently, it appears that the petitioners collected the Bank account number of the third respondent-Gram Panchayat and have directly deposited the property tax. The prayer in these petitions is to direct the third respondent-Gram Panchayat to issue the tax paid receipts consequent to the property tax paid by the petitioners. In this regard, representations dated 12 17.02.2020 and 05.03.2020 were made to the third respondent-Gram Panchayat.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the third respondent has taken a stand in the statement of objections that in view of Section 64(5-A) of The Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) since there is a direction to the Gram Panchayats to strictly comply with the provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, in the matter of issuance of building licence or approvals of housing or residential layouts and if any approval in violation of any of the provisions of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, is granted by the Gram Panchayats, the same shall be construed as misconduct for which the concerned Officer or official shall be liable for disciplinary action. Learned Counsel submits that reference is also made to Rules 11 and 12 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Gram Panchayats Taxes and Fees) 13 Rules, 1994, claiming to have power to delete the entry in respect of any land, if such entry has been erroneously made in assessment list through fraud, accident or mistake. Lastly, while pointing to paragraph-6 of the statement of objections, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the third respondent-Gram Panchayat is said to have passed a resolution dated 28.11.2019 to the effect that having noticed encroached on government gomal land to an extent of 92 acres in Sy.Nos.416, 450, 175, 176 on which the layout has been formed, the site owners were called upon to produce original title deeds, order or resolution passed by the Gram panchayat sanctioning the layout or the competent authority and conversion order etc. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that all these contentions raised by the third respondent in the statement of objections is not relevant to the facts and circumstances of this case. It is submitted that the only grievance voiced by the petitioners herein is that the third respondent has stopped collecting property 14 tax. The petitioners have deposited the property tax in time, in the account of the third respondent-Gram Panchayat and are seeking a direction at the hands of this Court to the third respondent-Gram Panchayat to issue receipts for having collected the property tax. The learned Counsel submits that all other contentions raised by the third respondent in the statement of objections are irrelevant and it is beyond the powers of the third respondent-Gram Panchayat to call upon the petitioners to furnish information which are not required for the purpose of assessment and collection of property tax. Moreover, it is submitted that the third respondent has been collecting the property tax for more than a decade now and all of a sudden it could not have stopped collection of property tax at the behest of the orders of the State Government.
5. Learned Counsel Sri B.J.Somayaji, appearing for the third respondent-Gram Panchayat submits that Section 64(5-A) of the Act, has been quoted in 15 the statement of objections only to apprise the Court that the Gram Panchayat cannot issue building licence in a layout not approved by the competent authority. The emphasis is on the resolution dated 28.11.2019. Though a copy of the same has not been furnished along with the statement of objections, when called upon the learned Counsel for the third respondent has furnished a copy of the same today. With reference to the said resolution, it is submitted that in terms of Section 72(2) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, the Gram Panchayat has power to remove any obstruction or encroachment or unauthorized obstruction of the like nature in any open site not being private property, whether such site is vested in the Gram Panchayat or not. In other words, it was submitted that since the gomal land which is a Government property, even if it is not vested with the Gram Panchayat, the Gram Panchayat is duty bound to protect such property and since it was found that the layout was formed by encroaching upon gomal lands, it was resolved by the 16 third respondent-Gram Pancahyat to call upon the petitioners to furnish a copy of the sanctioned plan, original title deeds etc. It is submitted that the petitioners could not have directly deposited the property tax into the account of the Gram Panchayat and coerce the Gram Panchayat to issue receipts.
6. Learned Counsel submits that there has also been an amendment to Section 199(1) of the Act, incorporating the words "based on capital value of the property". It is submitted that unless the assessment is made by the Gram Panchayat keeping in mind the changes brought to the Schedule IV of the Act, the petitioners could not have deposited the property tax without there being any assessment.
7. Heard the learned Counsels and perused the petition papers.
8. Section 58(1-A) (iv) of the Act, empowers the Gram Panchayat to revise and collect taxes, rates and fees periodically which are leviable under the Act. No 17 doubt, there has been some changes in the prescription to Schedule IV in accordance with Section 199 of the Act, when the words "based on capital value of the property" was added by way of insertion with effect from 25.02.2016. Similarly, sub- section 5-A was also inserted into Section 64 of the Act with effect from 23.02.2016.
9. In the opinion of this Court, the invocation of these provisions by the third respondent in the facts and circumstances of these cases is totally irrelevant. The invocation of Sub-section 5-A of Section 64 would come into picture, if the petitioners sought for a building licence. As noticed earlier, the lis in these cases is not about issuance of building licence. It is a clear case of the stoppage of collection of property tax at the hands of the third respondent-Gram Panchayat. If the third respondent-Gram Panchayat is invoking the powers vested under Section 72(2) of the Act, 1993, in order to protect gomal lands, in the opinion of this Court, such powers are not vested in 18 the Gram Panchayat. Since gomal lands belong to the State Government, the State Government is competent to proceed in accordance with law. Such allegation of encroachment upon gomal land and stoppage of collection of property tax is clearly arbitrary.
10. Section 72 of the Act, is a provision that empowers the Gram Panchayats to clear any obstruction, encroachment made on the property belonging to the Gram Panchayat, public streets, open drain, gutter, sewer or aqueduct in such street or places etc. Under the guise of the powers vested under Section 72, the Gram Panchayat could not have passed a resolution calling upon the petitioners to furnish the original title deeds, sanction orders etc. in the matter of collection of property tax. If it is the contention of the Gram Panchayat that the layout was formed without approval from the competent authority, action has to be initiated in accordance with law. At this juncture, it would be trite to notice 19 that such allegations of unauthorized layouts mushrooming in and around Bangalore City without approval of the competent authority have been the bane of the city. But the impugned action on the part of the third respondent-Gram Panchayat to armtwist the petitioners at this juncture to furnish documents and try to recover the so-called encroached portions of gomal land which belongs to the Government, is totally beyond the powers and functions of the third respondent-Gram Panchayat.
11. On a comprehensive reading of all the facts and circumstances and documents on record, it is clear that the third respondent has been shirking its responsibility of assessing the properties within its jurisdiction. The third respondent has registered khatas with respect to the individual sites and has been collecting property tax for more than a decade now. Therefore, without any rhyme or reason, the third respondent could not have stopped collection of property tax. It is because the Gram Panchayat did 20 not collect the property tax, the petitioners have though it fit to deposit the property tax directly into the account of the Gram Panchayat. Though this Court does not approve of the manner in which the petitioners have gone ahead and deposited the property tax into the account of the third respondent- Gram Panchayat, nevertheless it is still open to the third respondent-Gram Panchayat to verify as to whether the assessment made by individual tax payers is in accordance with law, if it is found that there is some deficiency, it can call upon the petitioners to make good the deficiency and thereafter issue the receipts.
12. The third respondent is also hereby directed that it has to continue collecting the property tax from the petitioners and as informed, there are more than 1400 site holders in the layout, therefore, it will be in the interest of third respondent-Gram Panchayat, to assess the properties in accordance with law and collect the tax and issue receipts. 21
13. With these observations, the writ petitions stand disposed of while directing the third respondent-Gram Panchayat to follow the directions given hereinabove and issue the receipts to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE JT/-