Karnataka High Court
Sri Siddaraju vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 January, 2024
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:754
WP No. 16313 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 16313 OF 2023 (LR)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SIDDARAJU,
S/O LATE CHOTAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT NO.114,
AKKURU VILLAGE,
RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT,
RAMANAGARA - 562 159.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. H.M. SURESH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
Digitally signed by REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
DHARMALINGAM
M.S. BUILDING,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
KARNATAKA BENGALURU.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
RAMANAGARA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
3. THE THASILDAR,
RAMANAGARA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C.N. MAHADESHWARAN, AGA)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:754
WP No. 16313 of 2023
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE R2 IN LRF 79(A)(B) /
RA/99/2015-2016 AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED:08.03.2017 BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION AND
ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned Additional Government Advocate takes
notice for all the respondents.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated
08.03.2017 passed by the Assistant Commissioner,
Ramanagara Taluk, Ramanagara District, under the
provisions of Section 83 for violation of the provisions in
Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms
Act, 1961.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has
been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice
NC: 2024:KHC:754
to the petitioner. It is further submitted that under similar
circumstances, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.7821/2021 has passed an order dated 16.08.2021
remanding the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner
for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of
hearing to the aggrieved person.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate points
out from the impugned order that notice was indeed
issued to the petitioner and in spite of notice having been
issued, the petitioner did not appear before the Assistant
Commissioner.
5. It is the contention of the learned Additional
Government Advocate that even as per the materials
available on record, after forfeiture, the excess lands have
been granted by the State Government to third parties.
The Assistant Commissioner is therefore required to
ascertain, whether the forfeited lands still remain with the
State Government or has been granted to third parties. If
the lands have been granted to third party, then sub-
NC: 2024:KHC:754
section(1) of Section 12 of the amending Act will apply to
say that the proceedings have reached finality. Or
otherwise, sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Amending
Act will apply and all further proceedings shall be declared
as abated by the Assistant Commissioner.
6. Having considered the submission of the
learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the co-
ordinate Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court finds that
facts and circumstances in both these matters are quite
similar and therefore, the benefit of the decision of the co-
ordinate Bench should also enure to the petitioner herein.
7. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The
impugned order dated 08.03.2017 passed in case
No.L.R.F.79(A) (B)/RA/99/2015-2016 is hereby quashed
and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the
respondent-Assistant Commissioner to consider the case
of the petitioner including the consequences of the
subsequent amendment brought to the provisions of
NC: 2024:KHC:754
Sections 79-A and 78-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms
Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020.
8. The petitioner shall appear before the
respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 31ST January
2024, without waiting for further notice from the Assistant
Commissioner.
Ordered accordingly.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is
permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of
four weeks from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE
rv
SNN
