Karnataka High Court
Shri. Channappa S/O Mallappa ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 January, 2023
Bench: E.S.Indiresh
WP NO.68572 OF 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
WRIT PETTION NO.68572 OF 2010 (LR)
Between:
1. SRI CHANNAPPA
S/O MALLAPPA NAVALAGI
AGE 50 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O SHINGANAHALLI
TALUK: DHARWAD
2. SRI SUNANDABAI
D/O MALLAPPA NAVALAGI
AGE 48 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O SHINGANAHALLI
TALUK: DHARWAD
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAGDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
And:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILDING
VIDHANA SOUDHA VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 1
2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL
BY ITS CHAIRMAN
2
WP NO.68572 OF 2010
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
DHARWAD
3 SRI RAJESAB
S/O HASANSAB HOLI
AGE 58 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O SHINGANAHALLI
TALUK AND DSTRICT:DHARWAD
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VINAYAK S. KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI V.G. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
R3 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09.08.2010 PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2; AND ETC.
IN THIS WRIT PETITION, ARGUMENTS BEING HEARD,
JUDGMENT RESERVED, COMING ON FOR "PRONOUNCEMENT OF
ORDERS", THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioners are challenging order dated 09th August, 2010
passed by the Land Tribunal, Dharwad (Annexure-A) to the writ
petition, confirming Occupancy Right in favour of the fourth
respondent herein.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioners' father
was cultivating the agricultural land bearing block No.87/1
WP NO.68572 OF 2010
measuring 8.36 acres situate at Shinganahalli village, Dharwad
Taluk as a tenant and after the death of their father, petitioners
are continuing to cultivate the land in question. It is further
stated that father of the petitioners and the respondent No.4
filed Form No.7 before the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal and
the Land Tribunal, by order dated 03rd July, 1976 allowed the
application made by the father of the petitioner and rejected the
application made by the respondent No.4. Being aggrieved by
the same, the respondent No.4 has filed writ petition and this
Court, on the earlier occasion, remanded the matter to the Land
Tribunal for fresh consideration. After remand, the Land
Tribunal, by order dated 05th September, 1988, rejected the
application made by the petitioners father and allowed the
application made by the respondent No.4. Being aggrieved by
the same, the petitioners have filed LRA No.407 of 1988 before
the District Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Dharwad and
same was renumbered before this Court as Writ Petition
No.27767 of 1992. This Court, by order dated 08th October,
1999 (Annexure-J) set aside the order dated 05th September,
1988 passed by the Land Tribunal and as such, directed the Land
WP NO.68572 OF 2010
Tribunal to hold de nova enquiry in the matter considering the
rival claims made by the petitioners and the respondent No.4.
Pursuant to same, by impugned order dated 09th August, 2010,
the Chairman of the Land Tribunal allowed the application made
by the petitioners, however, majority Members of the Tribunal
rejected the application made by the petitioners. Being
aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.
3. Heard Sri Jagdish Patil, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners; Sri Vinayak S. Kulkarni, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for respondent-State; and Sri
V.G. Bhat, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.
4. Sri Jagdish Patil, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, contended that the Tribunal has not extended fair
hearing to the petitioners and he further contended that, perusal
of divergent opinion by the Chairman and the Members of the
Land Tribunal, would indicate that the Land Tribunal has not
properly appreciated the direction issued by this Court in Writ
petition No.27767 of 1992 and therefore, he contended that the
WP NO.68572 OF 2010
impugned order passed by the Land Tribunal requires to be set
aside.
5. Per Contra, Sri V.G.Bhat, learned Counsel appearing for
respondent No.4 and Sri Vinayak S. Kulkarni, learned Additional
Government Advocate sought to justify the impugned order.
6. In the backdrop of the arguments advanced by learned
counsel appearing for the parties, I have given my anxious
consideration to the reasons assigned by the majority Members
of the Land Tribunal while rejecting the application made by the
father of the petitioners. The Chairman of the Land Tribunal,
after considering the material on record, opined that the name of
the father of the petitioner was reflected in the RTC extract for
the relevant period 1973-74 and therefore, I am of the opinion
that the said aspect of the matter was not properly looked into
by the majority Members. The majority Members of the Land
Tribunal, though were aware about the setting aside the earlier
proceedings by this Court in the aforementioned writ petitions
and this Court relegated the matter the Land Tribunal to conduct
de nova enquiry, despite the same, the majority Members have
WP NO.68572 OF 2010
inferred the evidence and finding recorded in the earlier
proceedings, which is arbitrary in nature and accordingly, I am
of the opinion that the petitioners have made out a case for
interference. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER
1. Writ petition is allowed;
2. Order dated 09th August, 2010 passed in
No.KLR/Shinganahalli/SR/3+82+94 passed by
the Land Tribunal, Dharwad is set aside and
the matter is remitted to the Land Tribunal,
Dharwad for fresh consideration in terms of the
judgment passed by this Court in Writ petition
No.27767 of 1992 decided on 08th October,
1999.
3. To avoid further delay in the matter, parties
are directed to appear before the Land
Tribunal, Dharwad on 13th February, 2023,
without waiting for notice from the Land
Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
lnn
