IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANASWAMY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.742 OF 2018 (KLR - RES) BETWEEN:
P.A. PRABHAKARA, S/O. LATE APPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT GUMMANAAKOLLI VILLAGE, KUSHAL NAGAR HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KIDAGY-571 236.
... APPELLANT AND:
(BY SRI.G.H.RAVIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE) 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI-571 201.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MADIKERI SUB DIVISION, MADIKERI, KODAGU DISTRICT, SOUTH KODAGU-571 201.
4. TAHASILDAR, SOMWARPET TALUK, SOMWARPET, KODAGU DISTRICT, KODAGU-571 201.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA) *** THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.01.2018 PASSED IN W.P.NO.14825/2017 (KLR-RES) BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION IN W.P.NO.14825/2017 (KLR-RES) AS PRAYED FOR.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR. J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard.
2. Appellant, in this appeal, is challenging order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge dated 02.01.2018 dismissing W.P. No.14825/2017.
3. Appellant claims to be in unauthorized occupation of 3 acres of land in Sy. No.5/1 of Gummanahalli Village of Somwarpet Taluk. The Deputy Commissioner, based on the recommendations of the Tahsildar earmarked 1 Acre in Sy. No. 5/1 for setting up water purification unit.
4. Appellant has approached this Court by way of writ petition contending inter alia, that while he was in unauthorized occupation of the lands in question Government ought not to have gone ahead and earmarked the land for setting up of water purification plant. The Hon’ble Single Judge holding that there is no vested right to seek regularization of land in the capacity of unauthorized occupant has dismissed the petition.
5. The learned Government Advocate submits that one acre of land is required for the public purpose and appellant’s application, if pending, shall be considered in accordance with law in respect of the remaining area of the land.
6. In the circumstance, we are at one with the Hon’ble Single Judge and dispose of this appeal with a direction to the respondents to consider petitioner’s application with respect to remaining area, if not already considered, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. Appeal disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE VK