Manohar S/O Venkateshwarao Kulkarni ... vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 29 November, 2022

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Manohar S/O Venkateshwarao Kulkarni ... vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 29 November, 2022

Bench: R. Devdas

                         -1-



            THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                       BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS
 WRIT PETITION No.202739 OF 2022 (KLR, RES)

BETWEEN

1.    MANOHAR S/O VENKATESHWARAO
      KULKARNI, DEAD BY LRS

1A)   SUNIL S/O MANOHAR KULKARNI
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
      OCC. AGRICULTURE,

2.    GOVINDRAO
      S/O VENKATESHWARAO KULKARNI
      DEAD BY LRS

2A)   RAGHOTTAM S/O GOVINDRAO KULKARNI,
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
      OCC. AGRICULTURE,

      BOTH R/O TALIKOTI VILLAGE,
      TQ. MUDDEBIHAL, DIST. VIJAYAPURA

      REPRESENTED BY:
      THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
      SRI. BALAJI S/O MADHUSINGH HAJERI,
      AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
      OCC. BUSINESS,
      R/O TALIKOTI TQ MUDDEBIHAL,
      DIST VIJAYAPURA 685101
                                           ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. R. S. SIDHAPURKAR, ADVOCATE)
                          -2-



AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
      REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
      REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY,
      M.S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001

2.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
      VIJAYAPUR DISTRICT,
      VIJAYAPURA 685101.

3.    THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
      OF LAND RECORDS
      OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
      VIJAYAPURA.

4.    THE CHIEF OFFICER
      MUNICIPAL COUNCIL TALIKOTI
      TQ. MUDDEBIHAL,
      DIST. VIJAYAPURA 685101.

5.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
      OF LAND RECORDS,
      OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
      VIJAYAPURA 685101.

6.    THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
      URBAN AND RURAL
      DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
      VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT,
      VIJAYAPURA 685101.

7.    THE TAHASILDAR
      MUDDEBIHAL, TQ. MUDDEBIHAL
      DIST. VIJAYAPURA.
                                      ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIRANAGOUDA M BIRADAR, AGA
FOR R1 TO 3 AND 5 TO 7;
NOTICE TO R4 NOT ORDERED )
                           -3-



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY
OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE
RESPONDENTS      MORE   PARTICULARLY   THE   SPECIFIC
DIRECTION MAY KINDLY BE ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENTS
NO. 1 TO 3, TO ISSUE REQUIRED NOTIFICATION AS PER SEC
68(1) AND (5) IF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT 1964
AND TO PREPARE AND ISSUE KAMMI JASTI PATRIKE AFTER
FIXATION OF BOUNDARIES IN RESPECT OF LAND SY NO.
257/1A, MEASURING 23 GUNTAS SITUATED AT TALIKOTI
VILLAGE, TQ, MUDDEBIHAL, DIST. VIJAYAPURA AND ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondents No.1 to 3 and 5 to 7. Notice to respondent No.4 is not necessary for the following reasons;

2. Petitioners No.1 and 2, appears to have filed a writ petition earlier in W.P.Nos.202954- 202955/2018 seeking a direction to the Assistant Director of Land Records (for short 'ADLR'), to prepare and issue an order (Kammi Jasti Patrike) in respect of 23 guntas of land in Sy.No.257/1A, of Talikoti village, -4- Muddebihala Taluk, Vijayapura District. This Court by order dated 12.04.2019, directed the ADLR to consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Learned Counsel submits that consequent to the directions issued by this Court, the ADLR passed an order dated 17.05.2019 declining to accede to the request made by the petitioner on the ground that 23 guntas of land which the petitioner is claiming in re-Sy.No.257/A, is a B-kharab land, mentioned as "Moram Khani" and therefore, the said B-kharab land belongs to the government and it is not permissible for the petitioner to make any claim and more so, before the ADLR. Thereafter, the said two writ petitioners again filed a writ petition in W.P.No.226975/2020. However, on 27.06.2022, the writ petition was dismissed, since steps were not taken to bring the legal representatives of the petitioners on record. -5-

3. This writ petition has been filed in the names of Sri.Manohar and Sri.Govindarao, however, showing their sons as legal representatives, without seeking leave of this Court. Be that as it may, although the ADLR has already passed an order stating that the land in question is a B-kharab land and therefore the request made by the petitioners cannot be acceded to, the petitioners are once again before this Court making same prayer seeking directions to the respondents to prepare and issue Kammi Jasti Patrike after fixation of boundaries in respect of the land in question.

4. In the considered opinion of this Court the prayer made in the writ petition cannot be granted. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders passed by the ADLR, they are either required to question the same or approach the competent authority as was directed by the ADLR.

-6-

5. For the reasons stated above, this writ petition stands dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to approach the competent authority to redress their grievances.

Ordered accordingly.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks from today.

Sd/-

JUDGE DL

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court