[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnatka vs Smt. Therejamma on 12 December, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:52817-DB
WA No. 1374 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1374 OF 2025 (KLR-LG)
BETWEEN:
1. STATE OF KARNATKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRL. SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN - 573 201
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT
D.C.OFFICE BUILDING, HASSAN - 573 201
Digitally
signed by
VEERENDRA 4. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
KUMAR K M SAKALESHPURA SUB-DIVISION
Location: SAKALESHPURA - 573 134
High Court of
Karnataka
5. THE TAHSILDAR
ARKALAGUD TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 102
6. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF
LAND RECORDS
ARAKALGUD TALUK
HASSAN DISTICT - 573 102
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:52817-DB
WA No. 1374 of 2025
HC-KAR
7. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
HASSAN DIVISION,
HASSAN - 573 201
8. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
CEN CRIME POLICE
DCRB DIVISON
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA)
AND:
1. SMT. THEREJAMMA
@ GRACY K.J. THEREJAMMA
W/O ANTHONY SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
RESIDENT OF 496
KRISHNA NAGARA VILLAGE
THATTEKERE
JODITHATTEKERE
HASSAN TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 217
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GIRISHA H.M., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT
APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION
No.23868 OF 2023 (KLR-LG) DATED 28.03.2024 & ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:52817-DB
WA No. 1374 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the
application―I.A.No.1/2025, the same is allowed. The delay of 468
days in filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an
order dated 28.03.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this
Court in W.P.No.23868/2023 (KLR-LG).
3. The respondent had filed the said petition, inter alia,
impugning an order dated 02.06.2023 cancelling the grant of lands
granted in favour of the husband of the appellant. The said petition
was allowed in part and the matter was remanded back to the
Special Land Acquisition Officer [SLAO] to have the value of the
standing trees in the granted land assessed at the hands of the
competent authority.
NC: 2025:KHC:52817-DB
HC-KAR
4. It appears that the order proceeded on the basis that the
cancellation order, which was impugned in the said petition had
been passed on account of failure on the part of the writ petitioner
to pay the value of the trees.
5. It also appears from the impugned order that the learned
Single Judge had set aside all observations made in the order
dated 02.06.2023, to the effect that the writ petitioner had not
established the extent of lands submerged or that she was the
owner of those lands. The learned Single Judge had held that the
observations were general observations. The order dated
02.06.2023 cancelling the grant was required to be set aside on the
ground that the principles of natural justice had not been followed.
The appellant now seeks to advance submission to sustain the
observations to the effect that the respondent had not established
that she was the owner of any part of the lands which were
submerged and thus had not established that she was eligible for
grant of alternate land. It does not appear that the aforesaid
contentions were advanced before the learned Single Judge.
NC: 2025:KHC:52817-DB
HC-KAR
6. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for
the appellants contends that the grant in favour of the respondent
has been cancelled as it was one of the grants that was considered
as illegal. He contended that on inquiry, it was found that out of
979 instances of grant of lands to landless people who had lost
their lands because of submergence on account of construction of
the Hemavathi/Yagachi/Vatehole Reservoirs, 414 grants were
found to be obtained by forged signatures. He further submits that
the grant in the case of the respondent is also called into question
as she could not establish the genuineness of the grant and the
same was cancelled.
7. The learned Single Judge had not accepted the above
contention and held that the observations in the order dated
02.06.2023 to the aforesaid effect are general observations.
8. After some arguments, the learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for the appellants seeks liberty to file a review
petition.
9. The present appeal is disposed of with liberty to the
appellants to file a review petition. Liberty is also reserved to the
NC: 2025:KHC:52817-DB
HC-KAR
appellants to file afresh. We clarify that all contentions of the
parties are reserved.
10. Pending applications stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(VIBHU BAKHRU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
KMV
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 22
