Sri K R Giddegowda vs State Of Karnataka
2024 Latest Caselaw 19878 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 19878 Kant
Judgement Date : 7 August, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Sri K R Giddegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 7 August, 2024

                                            -1-
                                                        NC: 2024:KHC:31452
                                                      WP No. 21122 of 2024




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                         DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

                                          BEFORE
                 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
                        WRIT PETITION NO. 21122 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
                 BETWEEN:

                 1.    SRI K R GIDDEGOWDA
                       S/O. LATE RAME GOWDA,
                       AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
                       R/AT KUDLURU VILLAGE,
                       BELURU TALUK,
                       HASSAN DISTRICT.
                       (SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED)
                                                              ...PETITIONER
                 (BY SRI. PRAKASH S SURYAVANSHI.,ADVOCATE)
                 AND:

                 1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                       REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY ITS SECRETARY,
                       M.S. BUILDING,
                       BENGALURU-560 001.
Digitally              DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE.
signed by
YAMUNA K L       2.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Location: High         HASSAN DISTRICT-573 214.
Court of
Karnataka        3.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
                       SAKALESHPURA,
                       HASSAN DISTRICT-573 214.

                 4.    THE THASILDAR
                       BELURU TALUK,
                       HASSAN DISTRICT-573 214.

                 5.    THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                       FOR HEMAVATI RESERVOIR PROJECT,
                       HASSAN DISTRICT-573 214.
                                    -2-
                                                 NC: 2024:KHC:31452
                                            WP No. 21122 of 2024




                                                    ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B P RADHA.,AGA)
     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO TAKE ACTION ON
REPRESENTATION DTD 28.05.2024, VIDE ANNEXURE-K.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

                           ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is seeking a mandamus against the

respondents to consider representation dated 28.05.2024

as per Annexure-k.

2. Petitioner herein, claims to be project displaced

person, who lost his valuable lands while implementing the

Egachi Dam/Reservior project by respondent-State.

Though respondents have granted the land reserved for

displaced person, the respondents have still maintained

the non-alienation clause in the revenue records and

therefore, the petitioner is aggrieved by the existence of

non-alienation clause, which is reflected in the revenue

records. Petitioner has placed the reliance on the

NC: 2024:KHC:31452

judgment rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

similar set of facts.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material

on record.

4. I have given my anxious consideration to the

judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench in

WP.No.1352/2024 dated 05.03.2024, Para Nos.5 and 6 of

the aforesaid judgment are relevant and the same is

extracted, which reads as under:

"5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the imposition of the non- alienation clause in the grant was not questioned by the petitioner when the grant was made and saguvali chit was issued. Nevertheless the period of non-alienation of 15 years has also since lapsed and no useful purpose will be served in considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner in that regard. However, this Court is also of the considered opinion that as directed by the Assistant Commissioner the petitioner need not seek any No Objection Certificate from the Tahasildar.

NC: 2024:KHC:31452

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the Assistant Commissioner to ensure that the flagging put up in the system restraining the transaction is removed, if not already removed in terms of the Official Memorandum dated 04.03.2024. The petitioner is free to transact with land in question. The concerned Sub- registrar is directed to receive the document if presented by the petitioner and process the same for registration in accordance with law. The Sub- registrar is also directed that if any such technical difficulty is faced, he should immediately bring it to the notice of the Assistant Commissioner and ensure that the transaction goes on smoothly.

Ordered accordingly."

5. In the light of the observations made by the

Co-ordinate Bench supra, the petitioner is entitled to seek

direction at the hands of this Court.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court passes the

following: