Karnataka High Court
Sri N Prakash vs State Of Karnataka on 4 August, 2022
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
WP No. 5757 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 5757 OF 2022 (LR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI N PRAKASH
S/O NARAYANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT NO 1032, 9TH CROSS
SUNNADAKERI K R MOALLA
MYSORE.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K SHRIHARI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO
REVENUE DEPARATMENT,
VIKAS SOUDHA, DR B R AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU 560001.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVSIION,
PANDAVAPURA,
Digitally signed by
GURURAJ D MANDYA DISRICT 571434.
Location: High
Court of Karnataka
3. TAHASILDHAR PANDAVAPURA TALUK
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVSIION,
PANDAVAPURA,
MANDYA DISRICT 571434.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SESHU.V.,HCGP., FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING QUASH THE ORDER
PASSED BY THE R1 DATED 26.01.2015 WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
-2-
WP No. 5757 of 2022
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned HCGP takes notice for all the respondents.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated
26.01.2015 passed by the Assistant Commissioner,
Pandavapura Sub-Division, Pandavapura, Mandya District,
under the provisions of Section 83 for violation of the
provisions in Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land
Reforms Act, 1961.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is
a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has been passed
by the Assistant Commissioner without notice to the petitioner.
It is further submitted that under similar circumstances, a co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.7821/2021 has passed
an order dated 16.08.2021 remanding the matter back to the
Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration after affording
an opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved person.
WP No. 5757 of 2022
4. Learned HCGP points out from the impugned order
that notice was indeed issued to the petitioner and in spite of
notice having been issued, the petitioner did not appear before
the Assistant Commissioner.
5. It is the contention of the learned HCGP that even as
per the materials available on record, after forfeiture, the
excess lands have been granted by the State Government to
third parties. The Assistant Commissioner is therefore required
to ascertain, whether the forfeited lands still remain with the
State Government or has been granted to third parties. If the
lands have been granted to third party, then sub-section(1) of
Section 12 of the amending Act will apply to say that the
proceedings have reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-section
(2) of Section 12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further
proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant
Commissioner.
6. Having considered the submission of the learned
Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the co-ordinate
Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court finds that facts and
circumstances in both these matters are quite similar and
WP No. 5757 of 2022
therefore, the benefit of the decision of the co-ordinate bench
should also enure to the petitioner herein.
7. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The
impugned order dated 26.01.2015 passed in case
No.¨sÀƸÀÄ:¥Àj²Ã®£É:55/14-15 is hereby quashed and set aside. The
matter is remitted back to the respondent-Assistant
Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner including
the consequences of the subsequent amendment brought to
the provisions of Sections 79-A and 78-B of the Karnataka Land
Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.
8. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-
Assistant Commissioner on 19th August 2022, without waiting
for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.
Ordered accordingly.
Learned HCGP is permitted to file Memo of Appearance
within a period of four weeks from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Psg*
