IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.8270/2018 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN HEENABANU W/O FAIROZ KHAN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS CHITTAVALLI VILLAGE VASTHARE HOBLI CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-577101 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI SUMANTH L BHARADWAJ, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER REVENUE SUB-DIVISION CHIKKAMAGALURU CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 101 2. THE TAHASILDAR CHIKKAMAGALURU CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE-F THAT THE ORDER OF NOTICE DATED:29.12.2017 PASSED BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRMS THE ORDER OF THE TAHSILDAR AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondents.
2. The petitioner has sought for quashing of the notice dated 29.12.2017 (vide Annexure ‘F’ to the petition) issued by Tahsildar Grade–2, Sub-Divisional Office, Chikkamagaluru, on behalf of the first respondent – Assistant Commissioner, Revenue sub-division, Chikkamagaluru.
3. Petitioner is said to be in unauthorized cultivation of the land measuring 02 Acres 20 guntas in Sy. No.50 situate at Chittuvalli village, Vasthare hobli, Chikkamagaluru Taluk. She claims that she had purchased the said land through auction sale by paying consideration amount of Rs.11,185/- vide receipt No.59371 dated 20.06.2017. She had filed application in Form No.53 under Section 94-B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. It is stated that: respondent No.2 – Tahasildar issued the grant certificate bearing No.vasthare/TT/1306/98-99 and Khayam saguvali chit No.232/2017-18 (vide Annexure ‘A’ to the petition) under the ‘Akrama Sakrama Scheme’ in favour of the petitioner on 18.07.2015; the said land was granted subject to certain conditions and pursuant to the said grant, the petitioner has been in actual possession of the same.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent - Tahasildar in spite of issuing the grant certificate, has initiated proceedings under Rule 108D of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, with reference to the order passed by the Committee for Regularization of Unauthorized Cultivation dated 12.07.2017.
5. Perusal of the impugned notice vide Annexure ‘F’ to the petition indicates that in the proceedings bearing No.Bahu:CR:236/2017-18 initiated by respondent No.2 – Tahasildar under Rule 108-D of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, before the first respondent - Assistant Commissioner, petitioner was called upon to appear before said Authority on 08.01.2018 at 3:00 p.m. and participate in the enquiry with reference to the decision dated 12.07.2017 taken by the Committee for Regularization of Unauthorized Cultivation of land for regularization of the land in question.
6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submitted that the petitioner in this petition is similarly situated as that of the petitioner in W.P. No.8268/2018, wherein similar notice issued in the proceedings before the first respondent - Assistant Commissioner was under challenge. Hence, this petition may be disposed of in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.8268/2018 disposed of on 06.02.2019.
7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed in terms of the order dated 06.02.2019 passed by this Court in W.P. No.8268/2018.
8. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents is permitted to file memo of appearance within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE sma