Sri Hidayatulla Babumiya Shaikh vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 1075 Kant

                           1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                       BEFORE

          THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS

          WRIT PETITION NO.21543 OF 2021 (LR)

BETWEEN

SRI HIDAYATULLA BABUMIYA SHAIKH
S/O BABUMIYA PAPMIYA SHAIKA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/AT NO.2, MANECK HALL,
EAST STREET, CAMP,
PUNE 411001                           ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
       AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
       VIDHANA SOUDHA,
       BENGALURU 560001,
       REP BY ITS SECRETARY

2.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
       HASSAN SUB DIVISION,
       HASSAN 562159

3.     THE THASILDAR
       ARSIKERE TALUK, ARSIKEREI,
       HASSAN DISTRICT          ......RESPONDENTS

( BY SRI. A.R. SRINIVAS, AGA)
                              2




     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE COSNTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO QUASH ORDER DTD.31.12.2016 PASSED BYTHE R-2
VIDE ANNXURE-D AND ETC.,

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

                          ORDER

R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated

31.12.2016 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Hassan

Sub-Division, Hassan, 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.

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

0W.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 inspite

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

31.12.2016 passed in L.R.F No.79(A) and 79(B) 53/2016-

17 is 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 first

respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 7th February

2022, without waiting for further notice from the Assistant

Commissioner.

7. If revenue entries have been altered pursuant to

the impugned order dated 31.12.2016, the same shall be

restored in favour of the petitioner.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE JT/-