Karnataka High Court
Smt Saroja A vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
WP No. 28599 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 28599 OF 2023 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SAROJA A
W/O LATE GOVINDANAYAK
AGED 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT AJIRALA HOUSE,
UPPINANGADI VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK
D.K.DISTRICT - 574 288.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K. SHRIHARI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M.S.BUILDING,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
Digitally signed by BENGALURU - 560 001.
SHARMA ANAND
CHAYA
Location: High 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Court of Karnataka
MANGALORE, D.K. - 575 001.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
PUTTUR SUB - DIVISION,
D.K. DISTRICT - 574 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
WP No. 28599 of 2023
QUASH THE JUDGMENT DATED 29/08/2023 IN REVENUE
APPEAL NO.1174/2016 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL FILED AS ANNEXURE-A, TO THE
WP.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the Judgment
dated 29.08.2023 in Appeal No.1174/2016 passed by the
Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (Annexure-A).
2. The petitioner along with one Smt. Shwetha (appellants
No.1 and 2 in Appeal No.1174/2016, on the file of Karnataka
Appellate Tribunal), claim to be the owner in possession of the
warga land to an extent of 3.82 acres in Sy. No.105/8 of
Uppinangadi Village, Puttur Taluk. It is further stated in the
Writ Petition that they were enjoying the land abutting to their
warga land measuring 0.45 acres in Sy. No.104/1A1AP1, under
kumki rights. It is further stated in the Writ Petition that
respondent - authorities had issued notice to the petitioner as
well as to her daughter Smt. Shwetha intimating about
withdrawal of the land in question to an extent of 0.45 acres for
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
the purpose of dumping of garbage and setting up a sewage
treatment plant(STP). The said aspect was objected by the
petitioner and Smt.Shwetha, before the respondent No.2 and
the respondent No.2 in LND(1)PDR.331/2015-16/168222 and
LND(1)PDR.330/2015-16/168220 has passed Order dated
22.04.2016 (Annexure-F1) and 16.06.2016 (Annexure-F2)
respectively, by rejecting the claim made by the respondents
therein and accordingly, granted permission for usage of the
said land for the purpose of dumping of garbage and setting up
sewage treatment plant as well as for the burial ground. The
said aspect was challenged before the Karnataka Appellate
Tribunal by the petitioner herein (along with her daughter) in
Appeal No.1174/2016 and the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal by
order dated 27.05.2020 rejected the appeal. Feeling aggrieved
by the same, petitioner preferred W.P. No.14420/2020 and this
Court, by its Order dated 05.01.2021, (Annexure-K), at
paragraph Nos. 7 and 8, held that the Karnataka Appellate
Tribunal has not considered each of the grounds urged by the
appellants therein, and accordingly, remanded the matter to
the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal for fresh disposal. Thereafter,
the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal passed the impugned order at
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
Annexure-A dated 29.08.2023 rejecting the appeal. Feeling
aggrieved by the same, petitioner herein has presented this
writ petition.
3. I have heard Sri. K. Srihari, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
4. Sri. K. Srihari, learned counsel, invited the attention of
the Court to the extent of land earmarked for the purpose of
dumping of garbage and setting up the sewage treatment plant
as well as for burial ground, which is 45 cents in land bearing
Sy. No. 104/1A1AP1. He further contended that the land
sought to be acquired for the said purpose is to an extent of 45
cents and the second respondent has passed the order without
giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and that apart
feasibility of the land for the intended purpose in question has
not been considered and accordingly, sought for interference of
this Court.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate
sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Karnataka
Appellate Tribunal by contending that the land has been
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
acquired for public purpose and therefore, no interference of
this Court is called for in this Writ Petition.
6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties, I have carefully examined the finding
recorded by the second respondent herein in the orders dated
22.04.2016 and 16.6.2016 produced at Annexures- F1 and F2.
7. On cursory reading of the reasons assigned by the second
respondent herein, same cannot be accepted as the kumki land
to an extent of 45 cents is sought to be acquired for the
purpose of dumping of garbage setting up sewage treatment
plant(STP) as well as for graveyard, since it is not in dispute
that the land is kumki land vested with the petitioner and
whether same could be used for such purpose has to be looked
into by considering feasibility of the land as well as the extent
of the land. In that view of the matter, I find that the reasons
assigned by the second respondent in the impugned orders at
Annexures-F1 and F2 are incorrect and accordingly, I find force
in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner.
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
8. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that it is
expedient to remand the matter to the respondent No.2 herein
by setting aside the order dated 22.04.2016 (Annexure-F1) and
the order dated 16.06.2016 (Annexure-F2) passed by
respondent No.2. Whereas these two orders were challenged
before the Appellate Authority in Appeal No.1174/2016. In that
view of the matter, the Judgment passed by the Karnataka
Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.1174/2016 dated 29.08.2023
(Annexure-A) also requires to be set aside as this Court is of
the opinion that the matter has to reconsidered by respondent
No.2 in terms of the observations made by this Court in W.P.
No.14420/2020 and in this Order.
9. In the result, the following:
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The Judgment dated 29.08.2023 in Appeal
No.1174/2016 passed by the Karnataka Appellate
Tribunal, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside.
(iii) The Order dated 22.04.2016 in LND(1)PDR.
331/2015-16/168222(Annexure-F1) and the Order
NC: 2024:KHC:19206
dated 16.06.2016 in LND(1)PDR.330/2015-
16/168220(Annexure-F2), passed by the second
respondent herein, are hereby set aside.
(iv) The matter is remanded to the second
respondent herein, for reconsideration of the matter
afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the
concerned parties and for considering the
objections, if any, that may be filed in the matter,
in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
sac
