Karnataka High Court
K R Lakshmikanth vs State Of Karnataka on 30 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
WP No. 10354 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.10354 OF 2024 (KLR-LG)
BETWEEN:
K R LAKSHMIKANTH
S/O RANGE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/AT KANCHAMARANAHALI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
HASSAN TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573219
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.PRASANNA B R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
Digitally signed DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
by ALBHAGYA M S BUILDING
Location: HIGH BENGALURU-560 001
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN-573 201
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITON OFFICER
HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT
DC OFFICE BUILDING
HASSAN-573 201
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
WP No. 10354 of 2024
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
HASSAN SUB-DIVISION
HASSAN-573 201
5. THE TAHSILDAR
HASSAN TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201
6. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN -573 201
7. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
HASSAN DIVISION
HASSAN-570 201
8. INSPECTOR OF POLICE
CEN CRIME POLICE DCRB DIVISION
HASSAN-573 201
9. SRI.KRISHNE GOWDA
S/O JAVARE GOWDA
MAJOR
R/AT BACHIHALLI VILLAGE
KATTAYA HOBL
HASSAN TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 128
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER NO.LND/HRP(D) 08/
2012-13 DTD 02.06.2023 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT
HASSAN/R-3 VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
WP No. 10354 of 2024
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
The captioned writ petition is filed assailing the
impugned order dated 02.06.2023 passed by respondent
No.3 - Special Land Acquisition Officer vide Annexure-A.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 6.
3. Facts leading to the case are as under;
The petitioner's vendor was displaced in view of
submerging of the land on account of implementation of
Hemavathi Reservoir Project. In the rehabilitation scheme,
the petitioner's vendor was granted the petition land and
consequently, the saguvali chit was issued on 03.03.2014.
The petitioner has purchased the petition land from his
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
vendor under registered sale deed dated 15.10.2014. The
petitioner based on the sale deed asserts title and
possession over the petition property.
4. The petitioner's grievance is that respondent
No.3, without conducting an enquiry and without hearing
the petitioner and his vendor, has passed the impugned
order and thereby, has cancelled the grant made in favour
of the petitioner's vendor. The said issue is dealt by the
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in an identical case.
5. In support of the case of the petitioner, the
judgments are cited by the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner. This factual matrix is not disputed by the
learned AGA.
6. The impugned order is not preceded by an
enquiry and therefore, the order cancelling the grant on
the premises that the value of the standing trees grown in
the schedule property was not assessed before issuing
saguvali chit and also on the ground that the Grantee has
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
not obtained NOC from the Forest Department is not
sustainable.
7. The records, prima-facie, reveal that the
granted land was not at all forest land. Therefore,
respondent No.4, without holding an enquiry and without
affording an opportunity to the petitioner, has passed the
impugned order. On this sole count, the order under
challenge is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed.
8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds
to pass the following;
ORDER
i) Writ petition is allowed in part.
ii) The impugned order dated 02.06.2023
in case No.LND/HRP(D):08/2012-13 passed by
respondent No.3 - the Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Hemavathi Reservoir Project, Hassan,
at Annexure 'A' is hereby quashed and
set-aside.
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
iii) The matter stands remanded back.
Respondent No.3 - SLAO to secure all
necessary information and then, determine the
value of the standing trees in the granted land.
Thereafter, information shall be provided to the
petitioner in terms of Rule 11 of the Karnataka
Land Grant Rules, 1969, if the value is to be
paid by the petitioner.
iv) On the other hand, if the valuation of
the standing trees is more than Rs.5,000/, as
provided in sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the
Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969, then the
SLAO shall have the trees removed in terms of
the provisions contained in sub-rule (3) of Rule
11 of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969.
v) At any rate, the SLAO shall keep the
petitioner informed of his decision having
regard to the provisions contained in sub-rule
(2) and sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the
Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969.
vi) Consequent to the restoration of the
grant in favour of petitioner's vendor, the
revenue entries shall also be restored in the
NC: 2024:KHC:29938
RTC by taking cognizance of alienation by
original grantee.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
NBM
