Karnataka High Court
C.B. Chandrashekar And Others vs State Of Karnataka And Others on 30 June, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(6)KARLJ345
ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Shankaranaraya for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.
2. The grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that they have applied for grant of 5 acres of land in Sy. No. 479 and authorities refused to grant the land on the ground that the land has been transferred to the Forest Department under Section 71 of Karnataka Land Revenue Act. They are aggrieved by the transfer refusal to grant land to them. In the statement of objections filed by Government it is reported that the Forest Department approached the Government and wanted the land to be preserved for forest. A spot inspection was made and it was found that there are valuable trees and it was so thick where it is believed 'Rishis' were sitting for meditation. There are temples where poojas are carried out. Therefore it was decided to protect the land and transferred to Forest Department by exercising powers under Section 71 of Karnataka Land Revenue Act. It is further submitted that Land Grant Rules says till the list of lands is made available and prepared as per Rule 3 and published as per Rule 5, no land can be granted on the application made by parties like petitioners.
3. Section 71 reads as follows:
"Lands may be assigned for special purposes and when assigned, shall not be otherwise used without sanction of the Deputy Commissioner.--Subject to the general orders of the State Government, Survey Officers, whilst survey operations are proceeding under this Act, and at any other time the Deputy Commissioner may set apart lands which are property of the State Government and not in the lawful occupation of any person or aggregate of persons in any village or portions of a village, for free pasturage for the village cattle, for forest reserves or for any other public purpose and lands assigned specially for any such purpose shall not be otherwise used without the sanction of the Deputy Commissioner and in the disposal of lands under Section 69 due regard shall be had to all such special assignments".
The power to grant land and reserve for Forest Department is not in dispute. The only prayer if at all they had, if the land is not in lawful occupation of any person or aggregate persons of any village or adjacent to the village, it can be transferred for free pasturage for village cattle, for forest reserves etc. It is not the case of the petitioner that they are in lawful occupation of the lands. Therefore, Section 71 certainly gives power to Government and so long as petitioners are not in lawful occupation of any portion of the land, it is not open to them to question the transfer under Section 71. It is also seen that the lands were not notified as available. In fact, the Appellate Tribunal referred this fact in para 6 of his order that sanctity of temples existing in the area and standing of medicinal herbs and the fact that it was a place of source of drinking water to Chickmagalur town and rejected the petitioners claim for grant. It also refers to the absence of list of lands made available for disposal in the order. It is also found that certified copy of proceedings of darkast Committee was not produced even before the Appellate Court as well as this Court.
4. In any view of the matter I find that once the Government has exercised the powers under Section 71 to transfer the land to Forest Department, the petitioner cannot have any grievance at all.
5. In this view, the petition is dismissed. It is open to the petitioner to approach the Government once again to grant of lands as recommended by the Land Grant Committee from other areas where lands are available.