IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.3566 OF 2019 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN:
ISMAIL, S/O MOIDIN KUNHA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/O 1-181/3, JOGIMOOLE HOUSE MANIKKARA POST, PERUJE VILLAGE, SULLIA THALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574 212.
(BY SRI SYED AKBAR PASHA, ADVOCATE) AND:
...PETITIONER 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER PUTTUR SUB DIVISION PUTTUR – 574 201 DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT.
2. THE THASILDAR SULLIA TALUK, SULLIA DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT – 574 201.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ORDER DATED 02.07.2018 ANENXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner herein is impugning the order of the first respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Puttur Sub-Division, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada District in Proceedings No.ADS L.N.D.C.R:203/2017-18 dated 02.07.2018, which is at Annexure-‘E’ to this writ petition.
2. The brief facts leading to this writ petition are as under:
The petitioner would contend that he is a grantee of land bearing Sy.No.154/P2 of Peruvaje Village, Sulya Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District measuring to an extent of 0.62 cents. According to him, the grant was made in his favour in the year 1998-99. However, there are no documents on record to show that. But the saguvali chit which is said to have been issued to him in Form No.VII under Rule 29 is at Annexure – ‘A’ which would indicate that the saguvali chit is issued to him on 02.03.2013. It is the said saguvali chit which was subject matter for consideration before the first respondent – Assistant Commissioner, Puttur Sub-Division, Puttur, based on a suomoto proceedings initiated by Tahsildar, Sulya Taluk. In the said proceedings which is initiated under Section 108-K of the Land Revenue Act by the Tahsildar, where alleged grant said to have made in favour of the petitioner is cancelled which is sought to the challenged in these proceedings.
3. The learned Additional Government Advocate would bring to the notice of this Court that the order made is an appealable order under Section 49(b) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. As such, the present writ petition is filed without exhausting the aforesaid remedy and is pre- mature in nature. Hence, the same is required to be dismissed.
4. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he had to approach this Court in haste for the reason that pursuant to the order impugned, there was an attempt to dispossess him of the said land and the same would be taken by the Revenue Authorities, thereafter he may not get justice. It is for the said reason he would state that the petitioner has approached this Court.
5. However, that cannot be the ground to invoke jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, that too when alternative remedy is available to him. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner by filing an appeal under relevant provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. The same shall be filed by him within thirty days, thereafter for thirty days, the Authorities shall not interfere with alleged possession and cultivation of the petitioner with reference to the property in question.
Sd/- JUDGE dh