IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.49008/2018(LB-RES) BETWEEN:
SMT. BACHAMMA W/O LATE. RAMAIAH WHO WAS ALSO CALLED AS RAMANNA AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS RESIDING AT IMMADIHALLI VILLAGE K R PURAM HOBLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK-560066 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.VENUGOPALA, ADV.) AND 1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATHI BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT K G ROAD, BENGALURU-560009 3. EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATHI HOSAKOTE BEGNALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114 4. VAGATA GRAMA PANCHAYATHI JADIGENAHALLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114 REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYATHI DEVELOPMENT OFFICER(PDO) 5. SMT NARAYANAMMA W/O LATE. VENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT HUNASEHALLI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALI HOBLI, VAGATA POST HOSAKOTE TALUK-562114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANANDISHWARA, HCGP.FOR R1, SRI.M.S.DEVARAJA, ADV. FOR R2 TO R4, SRI. A.G.NAGARAJA, ADV. FOR R5.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM R-3 IN RESPECT OF THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 25.8.2018 ANNEXURE-A, AND THE RECORDS IN RESPECT OF THE ORDER DATED 20.07.2018 AT ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE R-3 AND THE RECORDS RELATING TO THE RESOLUTION BEARING NO. NIL DATED 20.06.2018 AT ANNEXURE-C FROM VAGATA GRAMA PANCHYATHI JADIGENAHALLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK THE R-4 AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED: 25.8.2018 AT ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE R-3 AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
“a) Call for records from the 3rd Respondent Executive Officer, the Taluk Panchayathi, Hosakote, in respect of the endorsement bearining No.Ka ni a/tha punch ho/210/2018-19 dated: 25.08.2018 Annexure-A and the records in respect of the order bearning No.Ka ni a/Tha Panch ho/takararu arji/99/2018-19 dated: 20.07.2018 Annexure-B passed by the 3rd respondent Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayathi, Hosakote and the records relating to the resolution bearing No Nil dated:20.06.2018 Annexure-C from Vagata Grama Panchayathi Jadigenahalli, Hosakote Taluk the 4th resjpondent.
b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or order or any other suitable writ or order or direction quashing the impugned endorsement dated: bearing No. Ka ni a/tha punch ho/210/2018-19 dated: 25.08.2018 Annexure-A issued by the 3rd respondent Executive Officer the Taluk Panchayathi, Hosakote and quashing the order Bearing No. Ka ni a/Tha Panch ho/takararu arji/99/2018-19 dated: 20.07.2018 Annexure-B passed, by the 3rd respondent Executive officer, Taluk Panchayathi, Hosakote Bengaluru Rural District and quash the resolution dated:20.06.2018 Annexure-C passed by the 4th Respondent Vagata Grama Panchayathi. Jadigenahalli, Hosakote Taluk. Bengaluru Rural District.
c) Direct the 4th respondent to accept the kath of the “land in question” i.e., the property measuring EAST-WEST:170 feet and NORTH-SOUTH:55 feet, bearing Khaneshumari No.28 of Hunasehalli Village, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, in favour of the petitioner, d) Grant costs of the petition and e) granting to the petitioner such other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant to meet the ends of justice.”
2. The case of the petitioner is that the property bearing Khaneshumari No.28 situated in Hunasehalli Village, Hosakote Taluk was purchased by the husband of the petitioner from one Motappa and Lakshamaiah by a registered sale deed dated 15.7.1970. After the death of her husband, the petitioner has filed an application for change of katha in her name. The respondent-Panchayat passed an order for change of katha in respect of Khaneshumari No.72 in favour of respondent No.5. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat under Section 269 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short “the Act”). By endorsement dated 25.8.2018 vide Annexure-A, the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground that already an order has been passed for change of katha in favour of respondent No.5 in respect of property No.72 and the appeal cannot be entertained. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Sri.S.Venugopala, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Khaneshumari No.28 situated in Hunesehalli Vilalge was purchased by the husband of the petitioner by registered sale deed dated 15.7.1970. After the death of her husband, she has filed an application vide Annexure-C for change of katha in her name. The Panchayat has passed a resolution dated 20.6.2018 vide Annexure-C. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 269 of the Act before the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat. By endorsement dated 25.8.2018 vide Annexure-A, rejected the appeal on the ground that there is already a direction from the Taluk Panchayat to enter the name of the respondent No.5 in the katha in respect of Khaneshumari No.72. He further submits that in Annexure-B, direction is in respect of Khaneshumari No.72 but in the boundary, it is shown that it includes Khaneshumari No.28. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the orders passed vide Annexures-A and B.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 has submitted that the order dated 20.7.2008 passed by the Executive Officer vide Annexure-B is only in respect of Khaneshumari No.72. This property has nothing to do with the claim of the petitioner in respect of Khaneshumari No.28. Even though there may be a boundary shown in Annexure-B, but this order is in respect of Khanesumari No.72. In respect of the appeal filed by the petitioner is concerned, he has submitted that the order dated 25.8.2018 passed by the Executive Officer, Taluk Officer may be set aside and the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat may be directed to reconsider the application filed by the petitioner in respect of property No.28 after giving opportunity to both the sides.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
6. It is not in dispute that the husband of the petitioner has purchased the property bearing Khaneshumari No.28 situated in Hunesehalli Village, Hoskote Taluk by registered sale deed dated 15.7.1970. After the death of the petitioner’s husband, she has filed an application for change of katha in her name. The Panchayat has passed a resolution dated 20.6.2018 vide Annexure-C. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 269 of the Act before the Taluk Panchayat. The Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat by impugned endorsement dated 25.8.2018 vide Annexure-A has rejected the appeal only on the ground that there is already a direction to the Panchayat to give effect to katha vide order dated 20.7.2018 Annexure-B, the Annexure-B which is in respect of Khaneshumari No.72. This direction has nothing to do with the Khaneshumari No.28. The boundary which is mentioned in the order vide Annexure-B has no relevance and the only direction given is to change katha in respect of Khaneshumari No.72. Since property in Khaneshumari No.72 has nothing to do with the property in Khaneshumari No.28. The petitioner’s main claim in the appeal is that in respect of Khaneshumari No.28, the village Panchayath has refused to change the katha in favour of petitioner without giving any reason. This issue was not considered by the appellate authority and the petitioner was not heard before issuing impugned endorsement. Hence, the impugned endorsement issued by the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat vide Annexure-A is without application of mind. The same is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
7. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed in part. The endorsement dated 25.8.2018 vide Annexure-A issued by the respondent No.3- Exeuctive Officer, Taluk Panchayat is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat to restore the appeal filed by the petitioner and after giving opportunity to both the sides, shall pass orders in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE DM