Karnataka High Court
H.G. Shome vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30698
WP No. 6119 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO.6119 OF 2024 (ULC)
BETWEEN:
H.G. SHOME
S/O. LATE H.K.G. SRINIVASAN,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
R/AT NO.98/98
BRINDA NILAYAM, 3RD MAIN,
2ND CROSS, DODDANEKUNDI,
BENGALURU - 560 037. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI HARISH N.R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Digitally signed
by SHYAMALA 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
Location: HIGH BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
COURT OF KHANDAYA BHAVANA,
KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 009.
3. THE TAHASILDAR
BENGALURU-EAST-TALUK,
KRISHNARAJAPURAM,
BENGALURU - 560 036. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RADHA RAMASWAMY, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 15/04/1988, PASSED IN CASE NO.ULC (1) 104/1985-86 AND
PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED 19/03/1993 IN CASE NO.ULC (1)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30698
WP No. 6119 of 2024
104/1985-86 UNDER SECTION 10(3) OF THE ACT PASSED BY THE
SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
URBAN LAND CELLING, BANGALORE I.E. ANNEXURE-A AND B;
DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO DELETE THE NAME OF THE
GOVERNMENT/SARKARI IN COLUMN NO.9 AND 12(2) OF THE RTC
EXTRACT I.E. ANNEXUER-J2.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner seeks to quash the impugned order dated
15.04.1988, passed under Section 10(1) of the Urban
Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 (hereinafter
referred to as "the Act 1976" for short) at Annexure-A and
the order dated 19.03.1993 passed under Section 10(3) of
the Act at Annexure-B by the Special Deputy
Commissioner and Competent Authority, Urban Land
Ceiling, Bangalore (Annexure - B).
2. Heard Sri Harish N.R., learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. Radha Ramaswamy, learned Addl.
Government Advocate for respondents and perused the
material on record.
NC: 2024:KHC:30698
3. The material on record would indicate that the
father and mother of the petitioner purchased 10 guntas of
land each under a registered sale deed dated 17.09.1969
and 28.05.1970 in land bearing Sy.No.6/1H measuring 34
guntas from N.A. Krishna Reddy. The owner of the
schedule premises sold 33 guntas out of 34 guntas of land
and he had retained an extent of 01 gunta, and out of 01
gunta, 3/4th gunta was vacant land and 1/4th gunta was
dwelling house, the declaration was filed by the father and
mother of the petitioner in respect of 20 guntas in the land
bearing Sy.No.6/1H and it was ordered to be closed and
no further action was necessary under Sections 8, 9, 10 or
11 of the Act and endorsed the declarant and accordingly,
the Competent Authority issued an endorsement on
24.02.1988 and the owner N.A. Krishna Reddy filed
declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act in respect of 01
gunta, the Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned
order declaring 34 guntas (3,439.82 sq.meters) instead of
01 gunta on 15.04.1988 and was published under
Notification dated 19.03.1993.
NC: 2024:KHC:30698
4. The proceedings under the Act was dropped in
respect of 2,276.34 square meters dated 20.02.1988 and
subsequent order dated 15.04.1988 under Section 10(1)
of the Act and the publication of notification is without
perusing the order dated 20.02.1988 and the impugned
order is passed without perusing the documents and
without holding proper enquiry.
5. It is contended by the petitioner that the
repealing of ULC Act by virtue of Urban Land (Ceiling and
Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 with effect from 18.03.1999,
as held in various judgments of the Apex Court and this
Court including the case of Mukarram Ali Khan vs. State
of Uttar Pradesh and others1 (Mukarram Ali Khan )
all the legal proceedings stood abated including the
proceedings in relation to the petition land, since the
possession continued to remain with the petitioner and the
respondents did not take over the possession of the land
(2007)11 SCC 90
NC: 2024:KHC:30698
from the petitioner. In light of the same, the impugned
order needs to be quashed.
4. Further, it is brought to the notice of this Court
that under identical circumstance, this Court in the case of
Sri. N.G.Narayanamurthy and others vs. The State of
Karnataka and others2 in placing reliance on the
decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mukarram Ali
Khan has quashed the impugned orders dated 15.04.1988
and 19.03.1993.
5. A careful perusal of the material on record
would indicate that the possession of the petition land has
not been taken over by the respondents and in light of the
decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mukarram Ali
Khan and by virtue of repeal of ULC Act, all the
proceedings including the impugned order would stand
abated and deserves to be quashed and the present
petition needs to be disposed of in terms of the decision in
W .P.No.29669/2009 disposed of on 15.02.2024
NC: 2024:KHC:30698
in N.G. Narayanamurthy's case. In the result, this Court
pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned orders at Annexure - A dated
15.04.1988 and Annexure - B dated 19.03.1993 are
hereby quashed.
(iii) Respondent No.3- Tahsildar is directed to enter the
name of the petitioner in respect of revenue records
in respect of petition lands within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of certified copy of
this order.
Sd/-
(K.S. HEMALEKHA)
JUDGE
S*
