Sri Suhail Hidyathulla Shaikh vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 3239 Kant

                           -1-


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                         BEFORE

           THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS

        WRIT PETITION NO.20409 OF 2021 (LR)

BETWEEN

SRI SUHAIL HIDYATHULLA SHAIKH
S/O HIDAYATHULLA SHAIKA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT NO.2, MANECK HALL,
EAST STREET CAMP,
PUNE - 411 001
                                        ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.SHIVARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
      DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
      AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
      VIDHANA SOUDHA
      BENGALURU - 560 001
      REP BY ITS SECRETARY
2.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
      HASSAN SUB DIVISION
      HASSAN - 562 159
3.    THE THASILDAR
      ARSIKERE TALUK
      ARSIKERI
      HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R. SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA)
                                    -2-


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
ORDER DATED 22.02.2017 IN CASE PASSED BY THE R2 VIDE
ANNEXURE-D AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ENTER
PETITIONER NAME IN REVENUE RECORDS AS PER SALE DEED
VIE ANNEXURE-A, BY DELETING THE NAME OF THE
GOVERNMENT IN MUTATION AND RTC RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.,

    THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                                  ORDER

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice

for all the respondents.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated

22.02.2017 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.

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.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate 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. 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.

6. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The

impugned order dated 22.02.2017 passed in L.R.F 79(A) And

(B) 74/2016-17 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.

7. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-

Assistant Commissioner on 16th March 2022, without waiting

for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner.

8. If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to the

impugned order dated 22.02.2017 the same shall be restored

in favour of the petitioner.

Ordered accordingly.

Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to

file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks from

today.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DL