Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Rafi S/O Shaik Maheboob vs The Deputy Commissioner And Ors on 1 March, 2024
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1907
WP No. 223597 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
WRIT PETITION NO.223597 OF 2020 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED RAFI,
S/O SHAIK MAHEBOOB,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O H.NO.12-6-1238/34,
VIDYA COLONY,
POTHGAL ROAD, RAICHUR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed AND CHAIRMAN OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
by SHILPA R
TENIHALLI FOR SENIOR CITIZEN, RAICHUR-584 101.
Location: High
Court Of 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Karnataka AND CHAIRMAN OF SENIOR CITIZENS TRIBUNAL,
RAICHUR SUB-DIVISION, RAICHUR-584101.
3. SMT. FATIMA BE W/O SHAIK MEHABOOB
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: RETD, GOVT. EMPLOYEE
R/O H.NO.12-6-1238/34, VIDYA COLONY,
POTHGAL ROAD, RAICHUR-584101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAYA T. R., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI V. K. NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1907
WP No. 223597 of 2020
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING
THE ORDER DATED 29.08.2019 PASSED BY THE IST
RESPONDENT IN APPEAL NO.10/2019 AT ANNEXURE-G TO THE
WRIT PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard Sri Krupa Sagar Patil, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent Nos.1 and 2. No representation on behalf of
respondent No.3.
2. The present writ petition is filed with the
following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by
quashing the Order dated 29-08-2019 passed
by the 1st respondent in Appeal No.10/2019
at ANNEXURE-G to the writ petition.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1907
b) Grant such other relief/s, as this Hon'ble
Court deems fit in the circumstances of
the case, in the interest of justice and
equity."
3. The petitioner is the donee in the registered gift
deed said to have been executed by respondent No.3 on
25.10.2017.
4. The petitioner further contended that
respondent No.3 filed a petition before the Assistant
Commissioner/respondent No.2 under the provision of
Senior Citizens Protection Act, 2007, Rule 2009 for
cancellation of the gift deed. In respect of the gift deed,
already a civil suit is pending. The Assistant Commissioner
passed an order vide Annexure - E and dismissed the claim
of respondent No.3. The matter was carried to respondent
No.1/Deputy Commissioner, who without holding an
inquiry, passed an order vide Annexure - G on 29.08.2019
and proceeded to cancel the gift deed unilaterally. The
same is called in question by the petitioner.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1907
5. Sri Krupa Sagar Patil, learned counsel for the
petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition
contended that the order passed at Annexure - G is in utter
violation of principles of natural justice and sought for
setting aside the same and decide the matter afresh in
accordance with law in the light of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC
1684 in the case of Sudesh Chhikara v. Ramti Devi &
Anr.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader fairly submits that an enquiry should have been
taken by the Deputy Commissioner before passing order at
Annexure - G.
7. Accordingly, this Court perused the material on
record in the light of the submissions made on behalf of the
petitioner.
8. Admittedly, learned Assistant Commissioner
rejected the claim of respondent No.3 vide Annexure - E.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1907
Being not satisfied with the said order, respondent No.3
filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner.
9. Under such circumstances, the proper course
for the Deputy Commissioner was to notify the petitioner,
call for his objections, if any, and thereafter, hold an
enquiry and pass appropriate orders.
10. Being the Appellate Authority over respondent
No.2, without following the procedure and without notifying
the petitioner, respondent No.1 has passed the order under
Annexure - G which is in utter violation of principles of
natural justice.
11. Hence, a case is made out to allow the petition.
12. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. The order at Annexure - G is quashed.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1907
iii. The matter is remitted to respondent
No.1/Deputy Commissioner for disposal in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RSP
CT:SI
