Karnataka High Court
Annasaheb Tatya Ugare vs The Deputy Commissioner on 10 December, 2021
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION No.65893/2010 (KLR - RES)
Between
Annasaheb Tatya Ugare
Aged about 86 years
Occ: Agriculture
r/o Sadalaga, Tq: Chikkodi
District Belgaum.
Since deceased by his L.Rs.
1(a) Susheela w/o Shreekant Magdum
Age 58 years, Occ: Household Work.
1(b) Lalita w/o Jinendra Akkolle
Age 56 years, Occ: Household Work.
1(c) Leelavathi w/o Satu Savade
Age 44 years, Occ: Household Work.
1(d) Subhas s/o Annasaheb Ugare
Age 51 years, Occ: Agrl.
1(e) Sudheer s/o Annasaheb Ugare
Age 47 years, Occ: Agrl.
1(f) Sanjay s/o Annasaheb Ugare
Age 51 years, Occ: Agrl.
2
(All are r/o Sadalaga, Tq: Chikkodi
Dist: Belgaum)
(amended v/c/o dtd:25.6.2012) ...Petitioners
(By Sri Laxman T Mantagani, Advocate)
And
1. The Deputy Commissioner
Belgaum District, Belgaum.
2. The Assistant Commissioner
Chikkodi.
3. The Tahashildar, Chikkodi.
4. Appasaheb Tatya Ugare
Since deceased by his L.Rs.
4(a) Smt.Komal w/o Gundu Hullikoppe
Age Major, Occ: Household work
r/o Galatga, Tq: Chikodi, Dist:Belgaum.
4(b) Smt.Vatsala w/o Dharendra Magdum
Age Major, Occ: Household work
r/o Near Vikram Talkies, Jayasingpure
Tq: Shirol, Dist: Kolhapur
State : Maharastra.
4(c) Smt.Nirmala w/o Subhash Korucho
Age Major, Occ: Household work
r/o Bazar Peth Shamanewadi
Tq: Chikodi, Dist: Belgaum.
4(d) Smt.Mangal w/o Prakash Patil
Age Major, Occ: Household work
r/o Sadalga, Tq: Chikodi
Dist: Belgaum.
(amended v/c/o dtd:17.3.2015)
3
5. Mahadev Ganesh Joshi
Since deceased by his L.Rs.
5(a) Girish Mahadev Joshi
Age 65 years, Occ: Agriculture
r/o 37, Gurukrupa, Sangam Housing
Colony, Poona-Satar Road
Poona-411037.
5(b) Sadanand Mahadev Joshi
Age 62 years, Occ: Agriculture
r/o 37, Gurukrupa, Sangam Housing
Colony, Poona-Satar Road
Poona-411037.
(amended v/c/o dtd:24.3.2021)
6. Sakharam Ganesh Joshi
Age Major, Occ: Agriculture
r/o Sadalaga, Tq: Chikkodi
Dist: Belgaum.
7. Kuber Appasaheb Ugare
Since deceased by his LRs.
7(a) Smt.Surekha w/o Kuber Ugare
Age 51 years, Occ: Household work
r/o Sadalaga near Balwadi
Tq: Chikodi, Dist: Belagavi.
7(b) Deepa w/o Sheetal Patil
Age 31 years, Occ: Household work
r/o Jayasingpur, Sambajipur
Padmavati Society, Jayasingpur
By pass road, Tq: Shirol, Dist:
Kolhapur, State: Maharashtra.
7(c) Shantinath s/o Kuber Ugare
Age 29 years, Occ: Agrl.,
r/o Sadalaga near Balwadi
Tq: Chikodi, Dist: Belgavi.
(amended v/c/o dtd:9.3.2016)
4
8. Sukumar Appasaheb Ugare
Age Major, Occ: Agriculture
R/o Sadalaga, TQ: Chikkodi
Dist: Belgaum. ... Respondents
(By Smt.Girija S Hiremath, HCGP for R1 to R3,
Shri Rajendra R Patil for Sri Srinand Pachhapure, Advocates for R5(A & B),
Shri Lokesh Malavalli, Advocate for R4(A-C) & R8,
R4(D), R6, R7(A to C) served, R5 deceased)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order dated
29.7.2010 in No.RB.RTA.122/2009-10 passed by the Court of
Deputy Commissioner, vide Annexure-J.
This writ petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
passed the following:
ORDER
The petitioner was granted with occupancy right in respect of Sy.No.240/1+2 to an extent of 4 acres 10 guntas out of 12 acres 19 guntas, Sy.No.241/1+2 to an extent of 2 acres 10 guntas out of 8 acres 37 guntas and Sy.No.242/1+2 to an extent of 1 acre 32 guntas out of 6 acres 20 guntas all are situated at Sadalga village, Chikkodi Taluk by the Land Tribunal, Chikkodi on 25.10.1981. The 4th respondent was granted with lands in Sy.No.242/1+3 to an extent of 3 acres, Sy.No.240/1+2 to an extent of 5 acres and Sy.No.241/1+2 to an extent of 4 acres 15 guntas all are situated at Sadalaga village, Chikkodi Taluk. 5
2. On an application for resumption submitted by the 5th respondent, the 2nd respondent granted half portion to the northern side of lands bearing RS.Nos.240/1+2, 241/1+2 and 242/1+2.
3. When the things stood thus, the 5th respondent filed an application for sub-division of the lands granted to him with the 2nd respondent. In turn, the 2nd respondent directed the Tahsildar to sub-divide the lands in question granted to the 5th respondent after affording an opportunity of hearing to the interested parties. The Tahsildar concerned, however, without notice to the petitioner sub-divided the lands in question in favour of the 5th respondent. On the basis of sub-division of lands in question granted to the 5th respondent, the Tahsildar mutated the name of the 5th respondent in the revenue records. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. However, the 2nd respondent by order dated 2.11.2009 set aside the mutation entry effected in favour of the 5th respondent on the basis of the sub-division of the lands effected by the Tahsildar concerned. 6 Against the said order, the 5th respondent filed a revision petition under Section 136(3) of the Land Revenue Act. The 1st respondent by order dated 29.7.2010 allowed the revision petition and set aside the order passed by the 2nd respondent and restored the entry effected by the Tahsildar made in favour of the 5th respondent on the basis of sub-division. Taking exception to the same, this writ petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the mutation entry has been effected without issuing notice to the petitioner and sub-division effected by the Tahsidlar concerned is the subject matter of appeal before the ADLR. Hence, he submits that the impugned mutation entry in favour of the 5th respondent requires to be quashed.
5. On the otherhand, learned counsel for the 5th respondent submits that pursuant to the order of resumption, the lands in question have been granted in favour of the 5th respondent and in the light of the said grant, the name of the 5th respondent was effected in the revenue records and also on the 7 basis of sub-division effected by the Tahsildar concerned. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State would reiterate the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent No.5.
7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
8. Admittedly, petitioner has been granted with the lands in question by the Land Tribunal vide Annexure-A. On an application for resumption submitted by the 5th respondent, the 2nd respondent has granted the occupancy right in respect of lands in question in favour of the 4th respondent vide Annexure- D. The Tahsildar after effecting the sub-division of the lands granted in favour of the 5th respondent has mutated the name of the 5th respondent in the revenue records to the extent of lands granted in his favour. Petitioner's grievance is that the said mutation entry has been effected without issuing notice to him. 8
9. Be that as it may, the mutation was effected in pursuance to the sub-division of lands effected by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner states that an appeal is filed before the ADLR. When such being the case, the mutation entry effected in favour of the 5th respondent is subject to out come of the appeal pending before the ADLR. In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioner to challenge the sub-division effected by the Tahsidlar in favour of the 5th respondent in accordance with law if not already challenged.
Sd/-
JUDGE bkm