Renukadevi vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 8339 Kant

                            1        W.P.No.200156/2022


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY

     WRIT PETITION No.200156/2022 (KLR-CON)


BETWEEN:

Smt. Renukadevi W/o Nagshetty Patil,
Aged about 62 years, Occ: Agriculture,
R/o Ashtoor Village,
Tq. & Dist: Bidar-585401.
                                           ... Petitioner
(By Sri. Ravi.B.Patil, Advocate)

AND:

1.     The State of Karnataka
       By its Secretary to Government,
       Department of Revenue,
       M.S.Building, Bengaluru-560001.

2.     The Deputy Commissioner,
       Bidar District,
       D.C.Office, Bidar-585401.

3.     The Assistant Commissioner,
       D.C.Office, Bidar-585401.
                              2         W.P.No.200156/2022


4.   The Tahasildar,
     Thasil Office, Bidar-585401.

5.   The Village Accountant,
     Astoor Village, Tahasil Office,
     Tq. & Dist: Bidar-585401.
                                            ... Respondents
(By Sri. Bhojegouda. T. Koller, AGA for R1 to R5)

       This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ
of certiorari thereby quash the impugned order dated
06.02.2020 passed by the 2nd respondent authority
bearing     file   No.KAM/LND/CR-06/2019-20        as  at
Annexure-F, insofar relates to the land of the petitioner
in land (Old) Sy.No.3/1B New (Sy.No.3/1 measuring 30
guntas at Sl.No.07, situated at Ashtoor village, Tq. &
dist: Bidar as illegal and arbitrary and etc.

      This petition coming on for Preliminary hearing this
day, the Court made the following::

                       ORDER

The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this

Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of

India with a prayer to quash the order dated 06.02.2020

passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-F

insofar as it relates to the land belonging to the

petitioner bearing Sy.No.3/1B (old) Survey No.3/1

(new) measuring 30 guntas in Survey No.7 situated at

Ashtoor Village, Bidar Taluk and District and also to

direct the respondents to restore the revenue entries in

Column Nos.9 and 12 in the name of the petitioner.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the

absolute owner in possession of the land bearing

Sy.No.3/1B (old) Survey No.3/1 (new) measuring 30

guntas in Survey No.7 situated at Ashtoor Village, Bidar

Taluk and District. The revenue entries in respect of the

aforesaid land stood in the name of the petitioner. The

impugned order dated 06.02.2020 has been passed by

the respondent/Deputy Commissioner forfeiting the

aforesaid land belonging to the petitioner on the ground

that the petitioner has utilized the aforesaid agricultural

land for the purpose of forming an unauthorized layout.

Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before

this court.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner submits that the petitioner has utilized the

land in question only for dairy farming and therefore, it

cannot be said that the petitioner has used his property

for non-agricultural purpose. She has relied upon the

judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this court in

W.P.No.202042/2021 disposed of on 5th January 2022 in

support of her case and contends that in identical

circumstances wherein the land was used for poultry

farming, this court has allowed the writ petition.

4. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the

respondents submits that the order impugned would

prima facie show that the agricultural land of the

petitioner was being utilized to form an unauthorized

layout and therefore, the Deputy Commissioner has

rightly passed the impugned order. He submits that the

judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in

W.P.No.202042/2021 would, therefore, not be applicable

to the facts of this case and accordingly prays to dismiss

the petition.

5. I have carefully appreciated the arguments

addressed on both sides and also perused the materials

available on record.

6. The order impugned passed by the second

respondent/Deputy Commissioner as per Annexure-E is

relating to a series of lands belonging to various persons

and the very same order was questioned in

W.P.No.202042/2021 insofar as it relates to the

petitioner therein. The Co-ordinate Bench of this court

in the said case appreciating the fact that the land which

was the subject matter of the said writ petition was

utilized for the purpose of poultry farming has allowed

the said writ petition and has quashed the impugned

order insofar as it relates to the land belonging to the

petitioner therein and has directed the respondent

authorities to restore the revenue entries in the record

of rights in favour of the petitioner therein.

7. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner

has strenuously contended that even the present case is

covered by the said judgment, she is not able to point

out that her land has been used for the purpose of dairy

farming by producing any documents. On the other

hand, the Deputy Commissioner while passing the order

impugned has specifically stated that the petitioner has

utilized the land in question for the purpose of forming

an unauthorized layout. However, from the perusal of

the order impugned, it is seen that the said order is a

common order passed in respect of series of land

belonging to various persons. Further, the order

impugned does not reflect any spot inspection held by

the competent authority for the purpose of coming to a

conclusion that the land in question was utilized for non-

agricultural purpose as stated in the impugned order.

Therefore, the order impugned is prima facie erroneous

and it is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, the

following order:

ORDER

The writ petition is allowed. The order dated

06.02.2020 passed by the second respondent/Deputy

Commissioner vide Annexure-F insofar as it relates to

the land belonging to the petitioner bearing Sy.No.3/1B

(old) Survey No.3/1 (new) measuring 30 guntas in

Survey No.7 situated at Ashtoor Village, Bidar Taluk and

District is hereby quashed. The respondent/authorities

are directed to restore the name of the petitioner in the

Record of Rights of the land in question. However, this

order will not come in the way of the second

respondent/Deputy Commissioner in passing a fresh

order after holding an enquiry in accordance with law

and after holding a spot inspection of the land in

question to find out whether the petitioner has utilized

the land in question for the purpose of forming an

unauthorized layout and thereafterwards pass

appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Srt CT-SMP