Karnataka High Court
Smt Lakshmamma vs The Assistant Commissioner on 26 November, 2020
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B. M. Shyam Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.12067/2020 (LR)
BETWEEN :
SMT. LAKSHMAMMA
W/O NINGARAJE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT AKKURU VILLAGE
VIRUPAKSHIPUR HOBLI
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARAJ G. H., ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
RAMANAGAR SUB - DIVISION
RAMANAGARA - 573 130.
2. THE TASILDHAR
RAMANAGARA - 573 130.
3. SRI S. BABU
S/O SRINIVASA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
2
R/AT RAYASANDRA VILLAGE
HUSKUR POST, ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 099.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. VINOD KUMAR., AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. V.K. SATHYANARAYANA., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH OR
SET ASIDE THE ORDER 04.12.2019 IN CASE NO. LRF 79 (A) AND
(B) 93/2018-19 PASSED UNDER THE PROVISION OF
KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS
ANNX-H IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY. NO. 187/2,
MEASURING 1 ACRE 34 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT AKKURU
VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT CONSEQUENTLY DROP THE
PROCEEDINGS PASSED UNDER THE KARNATAKA LAND
REFORMS ACT, PASSED BY THE R-1 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents are heard for final disposal. The petitioner has impugned the order dated 4.12.2019 in LRF 79(A) and (B) 93/2018-19 on 3 the file of the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagar Sub- division, Ramanagar, the first respondent.
2. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner's vendor, Sri S. Babu, S/o. Srinivasa Reddy, is the erstwhile owner of the land measuring 1 acre 34 guntas in Sy.No.187/2 of Akkuru Village, Virupakshipura hobli, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagara District. The petitioner has purchased land measuring 37 guntas in Sy.No.187/2 of Akkuru Village, Virupakshipura hobli, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagara District from the aforesaid Sri S.Babu under the Sale Deed dated 10.7.2017. The revenue records for this property stood in the name of the petitioner's vendor, Sri.S.Babu even as of the date of the Sale Deed dated 10.7.2017 and even later. However, the first respondent has initiated proceedings alleging violation of provisions of Sections 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 in execution of the Sale Deed in favour of the petitioner's vendor, Sri S. Babu. The petitioner is not a party to the proceedings before the 4 Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagar Sub-division, Ramanagar, and he was not aware of the proceedings. Therefore, he did not contest the proceedings and the petitioner's vendor also did not contest the proceedings as he had transferred the land in favour of the petitioner by the time the proceedings are initiated. As such, the impugned order is in violation of the principles of natural justice.
3. In the meanwhile, the provisions of Sections 79A and 79B and Section 80 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 are deleted by the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance 2020, and the Government has issued Circular clarifying that in view of the Ordinance, all the pending proceedings, except the concluded cases, would abate. The records in the proceedings in LRF 79(A) and (B) 93/2018-19 indicate that though the Sale Deed dated 10.7.2017 is executed much prior to the date of initiation of the proceedings, the petitioner is not a party to the 5 proceedings. There could not have been a decision for forfeiture of the land without notice to the petitioner.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the fact that the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance 2020 is given effect deleting the provisions of Sections 79A and 79B and Section 80 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 and that the subsequent Circulars are issued clarifying that all the pending proceedings would abate, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order dated 4.12.2019 requires to be quashed. Therefore, the following:
ORDER The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 04.12.2019 in LRF 79(A) and (B) 93/2018-19 on the file of the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-division, Ramanagara, is quashed. The authorities are 6 directed to restore the RTC for the land in Sy.No.187/2 of Akkuru Village, Virupakshipura Hobli, Channapatna Taluk, Ramanagar, in favour of the petitioner.
In view of the disposal of the writ petition, pending application does not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE AN/-