IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.29480/2018(KLR-REG) BETWEEN K. C. KADARAIAH SINCE DIED BY HIS LRS., 1. C. PARVATHAMMA, W/O LATE K. C. KADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 2. NARENDRA PRASAD S/O LATE K. C. KADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 3. K. HARI PRASAD S/O LATE K. C. KADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 4. K. SOMASHEKAR S/O. LATE K. C. KADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 5. K. KANTHARAJ S/O LATE K. C. KADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 6. K. BHUVANESH S/O. LATE K. C. KADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT KENCHANA PALYA K. GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-560 060. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI M C BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, Dr. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DISTRICT, BANGALORE-560 009.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION, BANGALORE-560 001.
4. THE THASHILDHAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009.
5. THE CHAIRMAN LAND GRANT COMMITTEE, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560 060.
6. NARASIMHAIAH SINCE DIED BY HIS LRS., a. NARASAMMA, W/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, b. GOVARDHANA. N S/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KENCHANA PALYA, K. GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-560 060. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOs.1 TO 5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 06.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-K TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Before ordering issuance of notice to respondent Nos.6(a) and 6(b), this matter is heard.
2. Petitioners herein are the legal heirs of deceased K.C. Kadaraiah, who had filed application in Form No.50 seeking regularization of his unauthorized occupation and cultivation in respect of 04 Acres of land in Sy. No.26 situate at K. Gollahalli village, Kengeri hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru. They are seeking quashing of the endorsement bearing No.LND/RUC/C.R/58/15-16 dated 06.03.2018 (Annexure ‘K’ to the petition) issued by the fourth respondent, namely, Tahasildar, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru.
3. Petitioners have also sought for writ of mandamus inter alia directing the fourth respondent to place the application in Form No.50 filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah, the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner Nos.2 to 6, before the Committee for Regularization of Unauthorized Occupation and Cultivation of the Government lands (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Committee’) for fresh disposal.
4. The records would indicate that Sri K.C. Kadaraiah, the husband of petitioner No.1 and the father of petitioner Nos.2 to 6, had filed an application in Form No.50 under Section 94-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, read with Rule 108-C of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules 1966, on 19.08.1991, copy of which is at Annexure ‘A’ to the petition, seeking regularization of his unauthorized occupation and cultivation in respect of 04 Acres of land in Sy. No.26. The matter was placed for consideration before the Committee.
5. The Committee in its meeting held on 03.02.2004 decided to regularize an extent of 01 Acre 20 guntas in Sy. No.26 in favour of Sri Narasimhaiah, the husband of respondent No.6(a) and father of respondent No.6(b) herein. While doing so, the Committee has observed that only photocopy of the application in Form No.50 filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah was available in the records, but not the original application and in that behalf, instructed the Secretary of the Committee verify the records and thereafter, take necessary action.
6. Sri K.C. Kadaraiah being aggrieved by the said decision of the Committee, preferred an appeal under Rule 108-D(6) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, which was numbered as LND(RA)(BS)03:06-07, before the third respondent - Assistant Commissioner, who by his order dated 03.11.2008 (Annexure ‘B’ to the petition), allowed the said appeal by setting aside the decision taken by the Committee in its meeting on 03.02.2004 insofar as it related to regularization of unauthorized occupation and cultivation in respect of land (measuring to an extent of 01 Acre 20 guntas) in Sy. No.26 situate at K. Gollahalli village in favour of Sri Narasimhaiah. While doing so, Assistant Commissioner remitted the matter to the second respondent –Tahasildar / Secretary of the Committee with direction to personally conduct spot inspection with reference to the applications filed by the appellant - Sri K.C. Kadaraiah and respondent No.3 - Sri Narasimhaiah and place the said applications for consideration before the Committee to take action for regularization of unauthorized occupation and cultivation in respect of the said land in accordance with law. Further, the parties were directed to maintain status quo with reference to possession of the land in question.
7. It is stated that subsequently, Sri K.C. Kadaraiah made a representation dated 08.12.2008 (Annexure ‘C’ to the petition) to the fourth respondent – Tahasildar seeking change of mutation entries in the revenue records in respect of 01 Acre 20 guntas of land in Sy. No.26 in his favour by deleting the name of Sri Narasimhaiah.
8. Meanwhile, the order dated 03.11.2008 passed by the third respondent – Assistant Commissioner was the subject matter of challenge in Appeal No.LND(A)4/2008-09 preferred by Narasimhaiah under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, before the second respondent – Special Deputy Commissioner, who by his order dated 17.05.2010 (Annexure ‘D’ to the petition), disposed of the said appeal by upholding the order dated 03.11.2008 passed by the Assistant Commissioner in case No.LND(RA)(BS)3/2006-
07. Further, Special Deputy Commissioner directed the Tahasildar, Bengaluru South Taluk, to take necessary action as directed by the Assistant Commissioner as expeditiously as possible as per rules.
9. The material on record discloses that Sri K.C. Kadaraiah made another representation dated 10.06.2010 (Annexure ‘E’ to the petition) to the fourth respondent – Tahasildar requesting to place the applications stated to have been filed by him in Form No.50 and Form No.53 before the fifth respondent – Committee. According to petitioners, even though the Committee was constituted for regularization of unauthorized occupation of Government lands, the fourth respondent – Tahasildar had not taken any action to place the applications filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah before the Committee and hence, he made another representation dated 24/04/2015 (Annexure ‘F’ to the petition) to the fifth respondent – Chairman, Land Grant Committee, requesting them to regularize his unauthorized occupation in respect of the land in question.
10. Subsequently, the fourth respondent - Tahasildar vide endorsement, which is dated 20.07.2016 and signed on 21.07.2016 (Annexure ‘H’ to the petition) intimated Sri K.C Kadaraiah that applications filed by him in Form No.50 and Form No.53 for regularization of unauthorized cultivation of land measuring 04 Acres in Sy. No.26 were considered, however, pursuant to the amendment brought to Sections 94- A and 94-B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, and in the light of the circular bearing No.RD.168.LGP.2014 (Annexure ‘G’ to the petition) issued by the State Government on 09.06.2014, it was noticed that the land in question fell within the radius of 18 Kms. from the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for short, ‘BBMP’) limits, and hence, his request for regularization of the said land could not be considered.
11. It is stated that Sri K.C. Kadaraiah died on 13.01.2016 leaving him surviving his wife and children, who are petitioners herein. The grievance of the petitioners is that the endorsement dated 20/21.07.2016 was not served on them and in spite of repeated requests, the fourth respondent – Tahasildar had not taken any action to place the applications filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah before the Committee. Hence, they approached this Court by filing writ petition in W.P. No.40536/2016.
12. In the said writ petition, a coordinate Bench of this Court having regard to the submission made by learned Additional Government Advocate that if reasonable time was granted, the application dated 19.08.1991 filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah would be considered in accordance with law, passed order dated 24.03.2017 (Annexure ‘J’ to the petition) disposing of the said writ petition (W.P. No.40536/2016) by directing respondent No.5 – Chairman, Land Grant Committee, to consider the application dated 19.08.1991 filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah, the husband of petitioner No.1 and the father of petitioner Nos.2 to 6, if it was within time and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law subject to production of all necessary documents as expeditiously as possible.
13 Since the said order passed by coordinate Bench of this Court was not complied with expeditiously, petitioners herein filed contempt petitions in C.C.C. No.108/2018 and CCC Nos.145-149/2018 (civil) before this Court.
14 During the pendency of the said contempt petitions, respondent No.4 - Tahasildar has issued the endorsement dated 06.03.2018 (Annexure ‘K’ to the petition), wherein he has referred to contempt petitions in CCC Nos.108/2018 and 145-149/2018 (civil) and the representation dated 24.04.2015 (Annexure ‘F’ to the petition) made by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah and has reiterated the averments made in his earlier endorsement dated 20/21.07.2016 (Annexure ‘H’ to the present petition) and held that as the land measuring 04 guntas in Sy. No.26 fell within radius of 18 Kms from the BBMP. Limits as per the Circular No.RD.168.LGP.2014 dated 09.06.2014 issued by the State and pursuant to the amendment brought to Sections 94-A and 94-B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, applications in Form No.50 and Form No.53 filed by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah for regularization of his unauthorized occupation and cultivation in respect of the said land, could not be considered. It is the said endorsement which is sought to be challenged by the petitioners in this proceedings.
15 However, in the contempt petitions, CCC Nos.108/2018 and 145-149/2018, a Division Bench of this Court without going into the merits and demerits of the earlier endorsement dated 20.07.2016 issued by Tahasildar, Bengaluru South Taluk, has observed in its order dated 12.06.2018 (Annexure ‘L’ to the present petition) that when once the complainants’ application had been considered and rejected, a fresh cause of action had arisen in favour of the complainants – petitioners herein. Accordingly, Division Bench of this Court dropped the contempt proceedings against the accused therein by holding that the directions issued by the learned single judge had been complied with.
16. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5. On going through the impugned endorsement dated 06.03.2018 vide Annexure ‘K’ to the petition, it is seen that the land in question falls within the radius of 18 Kms. from the BBMP. limits, as per the circular dated 09.06.2014 issued by the State. The fourth respondent – Tahasildar / Member – Secretary of the Committee, who is authorized under the said Circular to deal with the applications in Form Nos.50 and 53 which were pending consideration before the Committee in accordance with law, in the light of the said Circular issued by the State and pursuant to the amendment brought to the provisions of Section 94-A and 94- B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, has rightly held that the prayer of the petitioners to regularize the land in question said to be in their possession and in respect of which applications in Form No.50 and Form No.53 were filed for regularization by Sri K.C. Kadaraiah, the husband of petitioner No.1 and the father of petitioner Nos.2 to 6, cannot be considered. No grounds are made out by the petitioners to interfere with the impugned endorsement.
17. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed.
18. Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to file his memo of appearance within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE sma