N. Prasanna vs The Assistant Commissioner
2022 Latest Caselaw 2675 Kant

                          1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                       BEFORE

          THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS

       WRIT PETITION NO.3667 OF 2022 (LR)

BETWEEN

1.     N. PRASANNA
       S/O SHRI NAGANATH
       AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
       R/AT RAMOHALLI VILLAGE
       NEAR BIG BANIAN TREE
       KENGERI HOBLI
       BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK PIN-560060.

     2. N SHILPA
        W/O N PRASSANNA
        AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
        R/AT RAMOHALLI VILLAGE
        NEAR BIG BANIAN TREE
        KENGERI HOBLI
        BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
        PIN-560060                  ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.RAVI PRAKASH V, ADVOCATE)


AND

1.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
       SOUTH SUBDIVISION
       BANGALORE
       OFF/AT KANDAYA BHAVANA
       2ND FLOOR, K G ROAD
       BANGLAORE-560009.
                          2




2.   THE TAHSILDAR
     BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
     OFF/AT KANDAYA BHAVANA
     2ND FLOOR, K G ROAD
     BANGALORE-560009
                                       ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.R. SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA)


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES

226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

QUASH   CALL    FOR    THE   RECORDS      FROM   THE

RESPONDENTS     WITH   RESPECT    TO     PROCEEDINGS

BEARING NO.LRF (83) (TA) 05/2016-17 AND QUASH THE

IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 DTD.14.2.2018 IN

PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO.LRF (83) (TA) 05/2016-17

VIDE ANNEXURE-J TO THIS W.P. AND CONSEQUENTLY

ALLOW THE W.P. HOLDING THAT THE PETITIONER HAS

PURCHASED THE LAND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW

CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE

CASE AND ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                             3




                          ORDER

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

The petitioners is aggrieved by the order dated

14.02.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner,

South Sub-division, Bangalore, 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 petitioners 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

petitioners 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 petitioners herein.

5. Consequently, the impugned order dated

14.02.2018 passed in No.LRF (83)(TA)05/2016-17 is

hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted

back to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner to

consider the case of the petitioners 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 petitioners shall appear before the

respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 7th March,

2022, without waiting for further notice from the

Assistant Commissioner.

7. If revenue entries have been altered pursuant

to the impugned order dated 14.02.2018, the same

shall be restored in favour of the petitioners.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KLY