Smt. Vijaya vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 1685 Kant

                           1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                      BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS

       WRIT PETITION NO.9358 OF 2021 (LR)

BETWEEN:

SMT.VIJAYA,
W/O RANGEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT ADARSHA NAGAR,
3RD CROSS, KASABA HOBLI,
HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT - 573 201.
                                       ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
       TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
       VIKASA SOUDHA,
       BANGALORE - 01.

2.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
       HASSAN SUB - DIVISION,
       HASSAN - 573 201.

3.     THE TAHASILDAR,
       HASSAN TALUK,
       HASSAN - 573 201.
                                     ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R. SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA)

    THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE
226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
                             2




QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER ANNEXURE - D DATED
22.12.2018   PASSED    BY    THE    ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER, HASSAN - SUB - DIVISION, HASSAN
ON THE FILE OF LRF NO.79(A) AND (B) 65/2016-17
AND ETC.,

     THIS  WRIT   PETITION   COMING   ON   FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated

22.12.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner,

Hassan Sub-Division, Hassan, under the provisions of

Section 83 for violation of the provisions in Section 79-A

and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

2. 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.

3. Learned AGA 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.

4. 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 therefore, the benefit of the

decision of the co-ordinate bench should also enure to

the petitioner herein.

5. Consequently the impugned order dated

22.12.2018 passed in L.R.F:79(A) & 79(B) 65/16-17

hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted

back to the second 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.

6. The petitioner shall appear before the second

respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 23rd February

2022, without waiting for further notice from the

Assistant Commissioner.

7. If revenue entries have been altered pursuant

to the impugned order dated 22.12.2018, the same

shall be restored in favour of the petitioner.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE rv