Karnataka High Court
Smt. K K Halamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 September, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
WP No. 21120 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.21120 OF 2024 (KLR-LG)
BETWEEN:
SMT.K.K.HALAMMA
W/O HULIYAPPA GOWDA
AGED 67 YEARS
R/AT SRIRANGA NILAYA
HOUSING BOARD
3RD STAGE, MIG 2
JYOTHI NAGARA POST
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577102
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFITS NOT CLAIMED)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.YASHWANTH C.R, ADVOCATE
FOR SRI.SADASHIVAIAH K G, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
CHAITHRA A
AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560001
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN - 573201
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
WP No. 21120 of 2024
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
SAKALESHPURA SUB DIVISION
SAKALESHPURA - 573134
4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITON OFFICER
HEMAVATHI RESERVIOR PROJECT
OFFICE OF THE LAND ACQUISTION
DC OFFICE BUILDING
HASSAN - 573201
5. THE TASHILDAR
BELUR TALUK
BELUR - 573115
6. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
D C R B DIVISION HASSAN
C E N CRIME POLICE
HASSAN - 573201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.HARISHA A.S, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE R4 IN CASE NO. L.N.D./YA.BHU.MA(D).46/
2006-07 DATED 15/06/2023 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
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
Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents.
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned
order passed by respondent No.4, who has proceeded to
cancel the grant on the premises that it is a fake grant.
The said order is under challenge.
3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and learned AGA. Perused the records.
4. The subject matter of the petition is the land
bearing New Sy. No.22 (Old Sy. No.81) measuring to an
extent of 2 acres 35 guntas, which was originally granted
to one Mallegowda. The petitioner contends that his
vendor Mallegowda possessed wet land measuring 23
guntas in Sy. No.72/4. The said land was acquired by
respondent No.4 for construction of Hemavati Reservoir
Project. The petitioner, who is the transferee, contends
that in terms of the scheme proposed by the State
Government, his vendor was compensated by allotting the
present petition land in 1991.
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
5. The short question that falls for consideration
is as to whether respondent No.4 was justified in canceling
the grant without notifying the petitioner or his vendor.
This issue is dealt by the Co-ordinate Bench. The
Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.7677/2024 has set-aside the
orders canceling grant on various grants and the matters
are remitted back to respondent No.4 to notify the
interested parties and hold an enquiry and pass
appropriate orders.
6. Para No.3 of the said judgment is relevant and
the same is extracted, which reads as under;
"3. Having regard to the ground on which
the impugned order has been passed, it is clear
that the SLAO has cancelled the grant on one of
the following grounds:
a) Grant was made to a person who had not
lost any land in submergence;
b) Bogus grant order has been created,
although no such grant order was passed;
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
c) Dual grant orders have been passed on
the basis of one award passed by the SLAO;
d) Such dual grant orders and fictitious grant
orders have been passed during the tenure of
Sri.V.Srinivas Gowda or Sri.B.A.Jagadeesh, who
were the then Special Land Acquisition Officers;
e) Land granted is a forest land and not
revenue lands and therefore, it could not have
been granted."
7. In the light of the directions issued by the
Co-ordinate Bench in an identical set of facts, this Court is
of the view that the impugned order under challenge is not
sustainable. The order of cancellation of grant, prima-
facie, is not preceded by proper enquiry. Therefore, the
impugned order passed in gross violation of principles of
natural justice is not sustainable.
8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds
to pass the following;
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned order dated
15.06.2023 in case No.L.N.D/Ya.Bhu.Ma
(D):46/2006-07 passed by respondent No.4
as per Annexure-A is hereby quashed and
set-aside.
(iii) The matter stands remanded back
to respondent No.4 to reconsider the matter
afresh after affording an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is
permitted to submit material to defend the
order of grant.
(iv) Insofar as the cancellation orders
passed on the ground that the land in
question is a forest land and not revenue
land and therefore, it could not have been
granted, respondent No.4 is required to
reconsider the matter after securing the
opinion from the Forest Department as well
as the Revenue Department. If ultimately it
is found that the land is a forest land, then
NC: 2024:KHC:35527
alternative lands shall be granted to the
petitioner.
(v) Consequent to the restoration of
the grant in favour of the petitioner, the
revenue entries shall also be restored in
the RTC.
SD/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
NBM
