IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NOS.52110-52112 OF 2017(KLR-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SMT.MUNIYAMMA W/O LATE SONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS RESIDING AT HAROHALLI VILLAGE SARJAPURA HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT 2. SMT.RANAMMA D/O LATE SONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT DEVARA BEESANAHALLI VILLAGE BELLANDURU POST, VARTHUR HOBLI BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 3. SRI J.YALLAPPA S/O LATE JUNJAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT HAROHALLI VILLAGE SARJAPURA HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT … PETITIONERS (BY SRI.NAIK N.R., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU – 560 001 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TECHNICAL ASSISTANT AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER’S OFFICE BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU – 560 001 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR LAND RECORDS BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU – 560 001 5. SRI NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE PAPANNA AGE MAJOR 6. SRI MUNIRAJU S/O LATE PAPANNA AGE : MAJOR 7. SRI MANJUNATH S/O LATE PAPANNA AGE MAJOR 8. SRI UMESH KUMAR S/O SRI G.N.VENKATESH AGE : MAJOR 9. SRI G.N.VENKATESH S/O SRI NARASIMHAREDDY AGE MAJOR 10. SRI V.UMESH KUMAR S/O SRI G.K.VENKATESHREDDY AGE MAJOR 11. SRI YALLAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE MAJOR 12. SRI MUNIYALLAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE MAJOR 13. SRI MUNIRAJU S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE MAJOR 14. SRI H.N.GOPALAREDDY S/O SRI NARAYANAREDDY AGE MAJOR 15. SMT.UMA ANANTHARAM D/O SRI S.ANANTHARAM AGE MAJOR 16. SRI GOVINDARAJALU VISHWATHAN S/O SRI GOVINDARAJAN AGE MAJOR ALL ARE RESIDING AT HAROHALLI VILLAGE SARJAPURA HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.KIRAN KUMAR.T.L, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) - - -
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order passed by the R2 on Suo-Motu proceedings in Land Survey Revision Petition No.17/2015-16, dated 16.10.2017 at Annexure-N and etc., These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER The petitioners are impugning the order of Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District dated 16.10.2017 in Revision Petition No.17/2015-16.
2. Admittedly, the said proceedings is under Section 56(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The material on record would indicate that respondent Nos.3 to 17 in the aforesaid revision petition, are either the grantees or purchasers of certain extent of land in Sy.No.64 of Harohalli Village, Sarjapur Hobli, Anekal Taluk. In the said proceedings, 1st petitioner Smt.Muniyamma is 9th respondent and 3rd petitioner J.Yallappa is 14th respondent and 2nd petitioner herein has joined the 1st petitioner on the premise that she has secured title in an extent of 2 acres of land bearing Sy.No.64 from the original grantee Muniyamma who is none other than her mother and 1st petitioner in this proceedings.
3. The proceedings in the said revision petition is a suo motu proceedings by the Deputy Commissioner for the reason that while conducting phodi of certain bits of land in Sy.No.64, an error was committed by the 3rd respondent namely the Technical Assistant and Deputy Director of land records of Deputy Commissioner’s office resulting in showing the location of lands of some of the grantees as overlapping on one another which was the subject matter of certain complaints before the Deputy Commissioner. Therefore, the 2nd respondent – Deputy Commissioner, after giving sufficient opportunities to respondent Nos.3 to 17 with reference to their title and rights to seek phodi and durasth of lands which are granted in their favour / purchased by them by the original grantees, sought to be verified by conducting re-survey of entire extent of land and take phodi and durasth work of each of the lands on the basis of their possession and location and in the aforesaid land with reference to document of grant which is available with them.
4. After hearing them, the Deputy Commissioner has rightly come to the conclusion that earlier phodi which is done with reference to only few of the grantees is erroneous and same not being conducted in the presence of all the grantees / subsequent purchasers of original grantees not being served with notice, the resultant position is that of overlapping of their respective possession. Therefore, by aforesaid order, he has remanded the matter to 1st respondent therein by setting aside new survey number given to some of the respondents in the said proceedings which includes the petitioners 1 and 3 herein also.
5. In that fact circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the order of Deputy Commissioner dated 16.10.2017 does not call for interference of this Court inasmuch as the same have been in the interest of all the respondents to the said revision petition who are none other than the grantees and subsequent purchasers. The exercise of phodi and durasth work in their presence collectively appears to be right approach and therefore, the said order being just and proper does not call for interference in these writ petitions.
Accordingly, writ petitions are dismissed.
However, it is made clear that phodi and durasth work pursuant to order of 2nd respondent – Deputy Commissioner shall be completed within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE RV