IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA W.P.NOs.27220-27221/2019(KLR-RES) BETWEEN 1. RAJEGOWDA S/O SATTIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 2. NAGEGOWDA S/O LATE PATEL NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT BANDIHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATTANA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT – 573116 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI NATARAJU.T, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN - 573201 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI IRRIGATION PROJECT (REHABILITATION O/O ASST COMMISSIONER HASSAN - 573201 3. SPECIAL REVENUE INSPECTOR CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK CHANNARAYAPATTANA HASSAN DISTRICT - 573116 4. THE TAHSILDAR CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK CHANNARAYAPATTANA HASSAN DISTRICT - 573116 5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR KASABA HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT -573 116 6. THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT DINDAGURU CIRCLE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 7. D.J. HEMANTH KUMAR REVENUE SURVEYOR TALUK OFFICER CHANNARAYAPATNA HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 116 8. RANGAPPA S/O THIMMAIAH RETIRED VILLAGE ASSISTANT BOOKS VILLAGE, HIRISAVE HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK – 573 116 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R1 TO R6) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED MEMORANDUM DATED:16.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND THE NOTICE DTD: 21.05.2019 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURES-H AND J RESPECTIVELY.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The impugned order of the Deputy Commissioner, Hassan District, Hassan, in imposing cost is hereby quashed. In the meanwhile, in the pending appeal, the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal is hereby directed to look into the endorsement dated 12.12.2012 vide Annexure-C in proceedings in No.MAA.H.A/20/12-13 where the particulars furnished by the office of the Special Land Acquisition Officer vide endorsement HEY.JA.YO (PU) should be looked into and if necessary, by securing the original documents from the said office to ascertain whether the grant made in favour of 8th respondent-Rangappa is genuine or not.
2. What is required to be considered in these petitions is whether respondent No.8, an ex-official of Revenue Department (retired Village Assistant) has concocted the revenue records and obtained Grant Certificate in his favour. The possibility of misusing his office cannot be ruled out. Hence, it is in this background, this Court would specifically direct the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal to ascertain whether the grant made in favour of 8th respondent is genuine or not more particularly, in the light of serious allegation made against him and thereafter to pass appropriate orders.
With such observation, these writ petitions are disposed of.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within two weeks.
Sd/- JUDGE TL