IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO. 868/2017 C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 54351/2017 (KLR - RES) IN W.P.NO.868/2017 BETWEEN:
MR. P.G.BRAHMAKULAM AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS S/O MR. GEORGE RESIDING AT NO.13, 4TH MAIN, B BLOCK VINAYAKA NAGAR, BANGALORE -560 027.
... PETITIONER [BY SMT. JAYNA KOTHARI, ADVOCATE] AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN, PODIUM BLOCK V.V.TOWER BANGALORE 560 001.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH (ADDITIONAL) MAHAVEERA COMPLEX K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 560 009.
[BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR T.L., AGA] …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS TO ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER INTO THE REVENUE RECORDS, MUTATION CERTIFICATE AND THE RTCS REFLECTING THE PETITIONER AS THE OWNER OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY.
IN W.P.NO.54351/2017 BETWEEN:
MRS. THERESA CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS W/O LATE SRI. I.S.CHINNAPPA RESIDING AT NO.88/1, 1ST MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPET BANGALROE 560 018.
... PETITIONER [BY SMT. JAYNA KOTHARI, ADVOCATE] AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN, PODIUM BLOCK V.V.TOWER BANGALORE 560 001.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH (ADDITIONAL) MAHAVEERA COMPLEX K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 560 009.
[BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR T.L, AGA] …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS TO ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER INTO THE REVENUE RECORDS, MUTATION CERTIFICATE AND THE RTCS REFLECTING THE PETITIONER AS THE OWNER OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R These petitions are clubbed together and disposed of by common order, since prayer sought in these petitions is common.
2. The persons who are claiming ownership to an extent of 4 acres each in the land bearing survey No.98 of Manchappana Hosahalli Taluk, presently, Bengaluru North Additional Taluk, have come up in these two writ petitions.
3. The writ petition in No.868/2018 is with a prayer for the writ of mandamus in directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to enter the name of petitioner as owner of said extent in the revenue records by effecting mutation of the said extent in his name and carrying out the said entries in RTC and other relevant documents and for other reliefs.
4. So far as petitioner in Writ Petition No.54351/2017 is concerned, she is also seeking the similar prayer, but slight variation in the facts. So far as this writ petition is concerned, she is seeking to enter the revenue entry in her name as the wife of original grantee.
5. Admittedly, there are several writ petitions filed with reference to land bearing survey No.98 of Manchappanahosahalli village, where several orders are said to have been passed in granting certain extent of land to each of them in the said survey number. Further, it is not in dispute that survey No.98 is a gomal land in which, according to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 there is no order for the said land being reduced from gomal to revenue use and made available to government for distribution to various beneficiaries who are claiming ownership based on the grant said to have been made in their names. Therefore, this Court feel that in the fact situation, the correctness or otherwise of the documents belonging to each of such applicants will have to be verified by the Special Deputy Commissioner, the competent authority, who is appointed under a notification dated 4th June 2010 bearing No.RD:711:LGB:2009(P) for holding an enquiry under Section 136(3) of the Land Revenue Act, to verify the correctness or otherwise of the grant made in respect of such persons. Similar exercise is also required to be carried out in the case of petitioners in both W.P.No.868/2017 and W.P.No.54351/2017.
Therefore, this Court would direct the common second respondent in both the writ petitions to conduct a similar enquiry with reference to the claim of the petitioners herein and pass appropriate orders.
6. It is further made clear that the said enquiry shall be commenced forthwith and the same shall be concluded within 90 days from the date on which the enquiry is commenced with reference to genuineness of the documents produced by the petitioners claiming ownership in the grant made in their favour.
7. It is needless to say that all the provisions of law as well as principle of natural justice is required to be followed.
8. Sofar as notice is concerned, it is made clear that petitioners in each of the case to approach the Special Deputy Commissioner-2nd respondent herein along with the representation with copy of the order passed in these writ petitions. The concerned authority by receiving the same, shall conclude the said enquiry within four months from the date of receipt of the representation.
With that observation, these writ petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE tsn*