Karnataka High Court

O C Krishnappa vs Karnataka Lokayuktha on 5 July, 2022

Bench: Acting Chief Justice, J.M.Khazi

                              1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2022

                        PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
               ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

                          AND

         THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M. KHAZI

            W.A. NO.1385 OF 2021 (GM-KLA)
                          IN
            W.P.No.53648 OF 2017 (GM-KLA)

BETWEEN:

O.C.KRISHNAPPA
S/O LATE CHIKKARANGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF OORUKERE,
KASABA HOBLI,
TUMKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 572 101.
                                        ... APPELLANT

(BY MR.A.V.GANGADHARAPPA., ADV.,)

AND:

1. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA
   REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
   M S BUILDING,
   BANGALORE - 560 001.

2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
   ZILLA PANCHAYATH,
   TUMKUR - 572 101.

3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
   TALUK PANCHAYATH,
   TUMKUR TALUK,
   TUMKUR - 572 101.
                             2



4. GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OORUKERE,
   KASABA HOBLI,
   TUMKUR TALUK AND DISTRICT - 572 101.
   REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

5. SMT.GANGAMMA,
   CLAIMING TO BE THE
   WIFE OF ASHWATAHA,
   AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
   RESIDENT OF OORUKERE,
   KASABA HOBLI,
   TUMKUR TALUK & DISTRICT - 572 101.
                                          ... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. VENKATESH S ARABATTI, ADV., FOR R1;
    MR.A.NAGARAJAPPA, ADV., FOR R2 - R4;
    MR.V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADV., FOR R5)
                            ---

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 02.12.2021 PASSED IN W.P.NO.53648/2017
AND BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED
FOR.

     THIS W.A. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                      JUDGMENT

This intra court appeal has bee filed against an

order dated 02.12.2021 passed by learned Single

Judge, by which writ petition preferred by the

appellant, has been dismissed and a direction has

been issued to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to implement

the recommendation dated 11.07.2017 submitted by

the Upa Lokayukta within a period of four weeks. In

order to appreciate the grievance of the appellant, few

facts need mention, which are stated infra.

2. One Chikkarangaiah had been granted land

measuring 1 acre of survey No.94 situate at Oorukere

Village in Tumkur by an order dated 30.01.1982

passed by Land Tribunal, Tumkur. The aforesaid

property devolved on his daughter viz., Rajamma on

the basis of a partition deed dated 31.05.1990. The

appellant claims to have purchased land bearing

Khatha No.340 measuring (45 x 30 + 36)/2 feet vide

registered sale deed dated 26.12.2008.

3. Respondent No.5 viz., the widow of late

Ashwath claims to be the owner of land bearing Site

No.11, Khatha No.2051 in Janatha Colony of

Oorukere Village, Tumkur on the basis of a Hakku

Patra. The appellant has filed a civil suit viz.,

O.S.No.875/2015 against respondent No.5 seeking

the relief of permanent injunction. In the aforesaid

civil suit, the trial court granted an interim order of

injunction dated 11.09.2015 and restrained grama

panchayat from interfering with the property of the

appellant.

4. During the pendency of the appeal,

respondent No.5 made a representation to zilla

panchayat to enter her name in the revenue records in

respect of the property in question. Thereafter, the

respondent No.5 filed a complaint to Lokayukta, in

which inter alia it was stated that she is the legal

representative of late Ashwath who was granted the

land bearing Site No.11. It was further stated that the

revenue entries made in her favour in the revenue

records have been transferred to the name of one

Rajamma by officers of the revenue department for

extraneous consideration. The Upa Lokayukta

commenced an enquiry under Section 9 of the

Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred

to as 'the Act' for short) and a report was sought from

the Chief Executive Officer of zilla panchayat who in

his report stated that by an order dated 07.06.2008,

the name of the appellant has been rounded off and

therefore, identification of the site boundaries with

reference to Hakku Patra has to be carried out and

action of eviction has to be taken against the

encroacher. The Upa Lokayukta submitted a report

dated 11.07.2017 under Section 12(1) of the Act. By

the aforesaid report, the Upa Lokayukta

recommended the appropriate authority to take action

to effect khatha of site bearing No.11 by identifying

the same with reference to boundaries mentioned in

hakku patra, to evict the persons who has encroached

the land and to hand over possession to respondent

No.5. The appellant challenged the aforesaid report in

a writ petition. The learned Single Judge by an order

dated 02.12.2021 dismissed the writ petition. In the

aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been

filed.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant

submitted that the dispute with regard to title in

respect of land in question is pending adjudication

before the civil court at the instance of respondent

No.5 in OS No.1010/2008 and therefore, the rights of

the parties could not have been adjudicated by Upa

Lokayukta. It is further submitted that report

submitted by the Upa Lokayukta is binding and the

same has been prepared without issuing any notice to

the appellant. It is further submitted that learned

Single Judge while dismissing the petition grossly

erred in issuing a direction to respondent Nos.2 to 4

to implement the recommendation made by Upa

Lokayukta.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the

respondents submitted that rights of the parties have

not been adjudicated in the report submitted by the

Upa Lokayukta and appropriate authority has been

directed to take an action to effect khatha of site

No.11 in the name of the complainant by identifying

the same with reference to the boundaries and to evict

any person who may have encroached the land in

question. It is further submitted that no interference

is called for in the order passed by the learned Single

Judge.

7. We have considered the submissions made

on both sides and have perused the record. Section 12

of the Act requires that report of enquiry into the

action complained of together with recommendation of

Lokayukta or Upa Lokayukta has to be forwarded to

the competent authority who is required to take an

action on the report. It appears that there is dispute

with regard to title as well as to the identity of the

property in respect of which the appellant and

respondent No.5 are staking claims. The relevant

extract of the recommendation reads as under:

8. Therefore, it is recommended in exercise of the powers vested under Section 12(1) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act to the appropriate authority to take action to effect Khatha of site No.11 bearing Khatha No.2051 situated in Oorukere village, Tumakuru Taluk in the name of the complainant by identifying the same with reference to the boundaries mentioned in the Hakku Patra to evict the person who has encroached and hand over the possession to the complainant.

9. Further, the competent authority shall to report within one month in relation to and in terms of Section 12(1) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act as to what action has been taken or will be taken.

8. Admittedly, no notice has been given to the

appellant in respect of the proceeding culminating to

submission of the report. However, it is pertinent to

note that the aforesaid report only enjoins the

appropriate authority to take action to effect Khatha

of Site No.11 in the name of the complainant by

identifying the same with reference to the boundaries

and to evict the person who has encroached the land.

An action for implementation of the aforesaid report

has to be taken by the appropriate authority. Needless

to state that no action can be taken against the

appellant in pursuance of the aforesaid