IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.19861 OF 2010 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
N.SUBRAMANYA, S/O K.S.NAGARAJA @ K.NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT T.S.SHANTHAMMA BUILDING, 171/3, VARASIDHI VINAYAKA TEMPLE STREET, III BLOCK, THYAGARAJANAGAR, BENGALURU. ...PETITIONER (By Sri JOSE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY REVENUE SECRETARY, M.S.BUILDING, K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU.
2. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER D.C.COMPOUND, BENGALURU – 560 009.
3. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU NORTH TALUK K.G.ROAD, KIDS KEMP BUILDING, BENGALURU – 562 009.
4. B.M.T.C. DOUBLE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 027. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
5. D.DEVARAJ URS TRUCK TERMINAL LIMITED, 3RD FLOOR, SHANTHINAGAR, TTMC, ‘B’ BLOCK, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 029.
REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI KIRANKUMAR.T.L., AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI P.D.SURANA, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
SRI A.SRIKANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, THE 2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN DATED 27.11.2006 UNDER THE ORIGINAL OF ANNEXURE-L AND ALSO CONSEQUENTIAL ENTRIES MADE BY THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK IN ENTERING THE NAME OF BMTC IN THE MUTAION AS WELL AS RTC UNDER THE ORIGINAL OF ANNEXURES – ‘M’ AND ‘N’.
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This writ petition is filed impugning the order dated 27.11.2006 in LND(N)CR 2/2006-07 (vide Annexure – ‘L’) issued by second respondent - Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District. The said order is under challenge on the premise that the petitioner is a grantee of an extent of 02 acres 22 guntas of land bearing Sy.No.45 of Dasanapura Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. According to petitioner, the second respondent vide Annexure – ‘L’ has granted 12 acres 22 guntas of land in the said survey number 45 of Dasanapura Village in favour of the fourth respondent for the purpose of establishing Truck Terminal thereon.
2. Brief facts leading to this petition are as under:
Petitioner herein would claim that he is grantee of 2 acres 20 guntas in Sy.No.45 of Dasanapura Village vide order dated 08.03.1979 in B.DIS.LND(1) SR.24/1978-79, issued by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District. It is stated in the said order, besides him, other four persons were also granted different extent of land in the very same survey number of Dasanapura Village, based on which, a saguvali chit is also said to have been issued in his name. It is stated that the Survey Department identified the extent of land, which is granted in his favour as Block No.5 of Sy.No.45, which totally measures 13 acres 28 guntas with 01 acre 09 guntas as kharab and 12 acres 22 guntas ain land as per the Index of Land and Records maintained in the office of the Deputy Commissioner.
3. When the matter stood thus, it is seen that the entire extent of Sy.No.45 is granted in favour of the fourth respondent for the purpose of construction of bus depot on the said land vide order dated 27.11.2006, which is at Annexure – ‘L’. The same is under challenge by filing the present writ petition on 26.06.2010. However, in this writ petition, what is required to be seen is whether the petitioner had right to file the petition as owner of land bearing Sy.No.45. The aforesaid question arises in the light of the proceedings being initiated before the second respondent, Special Deputy Commissioner in No.RRT/2N/CR/115/2006-07 where the Special Deputy Commissioner took up the aforesaid proceedings to ascertain the correctness or otherwise of grant made in favour of five persons vide Annexure – ‘A1’ to these proceedings.
4. In the said proceedings, after issuing notice to all the grantees including the petitioner herein, an enquiry was conducted and thereafter, after having found that the order of grant in his favour as well as saguvali chit, which he is relying upon are found to be fraudulent and fake documents, which are created for the purpose of securing title to the Government land, which is not allotted in his favour, all the revenue entries are cancelled in holding that there was no grant made in favour of anybody including the petitioner herein under the so-called order dated 08.03.1979, which is at Annexure – ‘A1’ to these proceedings.
5. Admittedly, the said proceedings was well within the knowledge of the petitioner. Therefore, as on 23.12.2009, petitioner knew that the alleged grant in his favour is held to be fraudulent. Admittedly, no challenge is made to the order dated 23.12.2009 passed in No.RRT/2N/CR/ 115/2006-07, which was passed by the second respondent herein. Inspite of the petitioner having lost his rights on the aforesaid land has initiated these proceedings suppressing the same and projecting himself as a grantee.
6. When this mater was taken up for consideration on 31.10.2017, this Court directed the Additional Government Advocate to secure the records pertaining to the aforesaid land to verify whether any grant is made in favour of the petitioner and whether his alleged right to an extent of 2 acres 20 guntas in Sy.No.45 of Dasanapura Village is distributed wrongly in including said extent in the land granted in favour of BMTC for the purpose of construction of bus depot. When the entire records which are produced before this Court is looked into, it is clearly seen that the alleged grant in favour of the petitioner and four others on 08.03.1979 is a bogus and fake document, which was the subject matter of proceedings before the second respondent in the aforesaid RRT proceedings wherein the petitioner and other persons similarly placed were not able to establish that grant made in their favour was genuine. Accordingly, the alleged grant is declared to be fraudulent transaction and all the revenue entries pursuant thereto is also cancelled.
7. It is only thereafter the present writ petition is filed. The filing of this writ petition is without any legal right in as much as the petitioner has no locus to initiate proceedings claiming himself to be the owner of 2 acres 20 guntas of land in Sy.No.45 of Dasanapura Village.
8. In addition to that, there is a deliberate attempt on the part of the petitioner in not bringing to the notice of this Court that, RRT proceedings were initiated against him and other alleged beneficiaries of grant vide order dated 08.03.1979. He has deliberately suppressed the order of the second respondent in holding the grant made in his favour and others is fake. Another important thing to be noticed is, though the alleged grant made in his favour is declared to be fraudulent by order of the second respondent dated 23.12.2009, till today, the same is not subjected to challenge in any proceedings. In that view of the matter, this writ petition does not merit consideration and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE dh