Sri Kiran Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 3413 Kant

                         1


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                      BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

             W.P. NO.4272 OF 2022 (LR)

BETWEEN:

SRI. KIRAN KUMAR,
S/O NAGARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF KALEEGOWDANADODDI VILLAGE,
SHEEGEKOTE, KASABA HOBLI,
KANAKAPURA,
RAMANAGARA - 562 117.
                                   ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.G.M.SRINIVASAREDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       REPRESENTED ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
       DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
       M S BUILDING,
       BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
       RAMANAGARA TOWN,
       RAMANAGARA - 562 159.

3.     THE TAHSILDAR,
       KANAKAPURA TALUK,
       RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.

                                  ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SRINIVAS GOWDA R., AGA)
                           2


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2020
PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE - A;
GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY ALL FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO PASSING OF THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.03.2020 PASSED BY THE
R2 VIDE ANNEXURE - A, PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE
ABOVE WRIT PETITION.

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

                       ORDER

The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the

agricultural property bearing Sy.No.92 measuring 6

acres 12 guntas of land situated at Hanumanahalli

Village, Kasaba Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara

District, through registered sale deed dated 15.06.2012

that he is an agriculturist and the said purchase is in

accordance with law. However, respondent No.2 has

erroneously passed the impugned order wherein it is

held that the said purchase is in violation of the

provisions under Sections 79(A) and 79(B) of Karnataka

Land Reforms Act, 1961 and the said property has been

sought to be forfeited by the State Government. It is

further contended that subsequent to the amendment,

the entire proceedings in respect of the said lands

abates and the impugned order is not sustainable.

2. It is submitted by both the learned counsel

for the petitioner and learned Additional Government

Advocate appearing for respondents 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. Having considered the submissions of the

learned counsel and on perusing the judgment of the

co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court

finds that the facts and circumstances in both these

cases are similar and therefore, the benefit of the

decision of the co-ordinate Bench should also enure to

the benefit of the petitioner herein.

4. Consequently, the impugned order dated

13.03.2020 passed in LRF:NO.79(A) AND (B)

133/2012-13 by respondent No.2 is hereby 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

amendment brought to the provisions of Sections 79-

A and 78-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act and

pass suitable orders.

5. The petitioner shall appear before the

second respondent - Assistant Commissioner on 28th

March 2022, without waiting for further notice from

the second respondent - Assistant Commissioner.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

AG