IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.8871/2019 (SC/ST) BETWEEN:
A.M.G Surendar, S/o Late M.D.Anthony Raj, Aged about 55 years, R/at No.536, Sector-3, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110022. Represented by his, Power of Attorney Holder, Mr. A.M.Stanislaus, Aged about 62 years. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Harish V S, Advocate) AND:
1. Mr. K.V.Munirajappa, S/o. Mr. Obaiah, Aged about 55 years, R/at. Karappanahalli village, Nandagudi hobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District-562114.
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Doddabalapura Sub-Division, Doddabalapura-561203.
3. The Tahsildar, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District-562114. ... Respondents (By Sri. Vignesh Shetty, Advocate for C/R1; Smt. Savithramma, HCGP for R2 and R3) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order passed by the R-2 dated 19.12.2018 i.e., Annexure-G and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner who represents the purchaser states that the grant is stated to have been made in the year 1940 and the first sale transaction was on 25.07.1963 and proceedings have been initiated on behalf of the grantee’s family only in the year 2014- 2015 and hence, contends that on the face of it, proceedings initiated after unreasonable and after unexplained period of delay which ought not to have been entertained by the Assistant Commissioner.
2. However, it is to be noted that there is a remedy by way of an appeal against the order of the Assistant Commissioner under Section 5-A of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (‘the Act’ for brevity).
3. The adjudication would involve appreciation of certain facts and pleadings on record. Hence, it would be appropriate that the matter be relegated directing the petitioner to exhaust the appeal remedy under the Act.
4. The petitioner further states that pursuant to the order of the Assistant Commissioner passed on 19.12.2018, undue haste has been shown by the Revenue Authorities in transferring the revenue entries in the name of Legal Heirs of the grantee effected on 20.02.2019.
5. In light of the remedy available under Section 5-A of the Act, petition is disposed of relegating the party to avail of the alternative remedy of appeal.
In the meanwhile, the order of the Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-G dated 19.12.2018 would be kept in abeyance for a period of six weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE RB