Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sannamma W/O Sannathame Gowda vs The Assistant Commissioner And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|29 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR W.P.NO.31559/2019(KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
SANNAMMA W/O SANNATHAME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDENT OF HEGGADIHALLI VILLAGE, SHANTHI GRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN – 573 201.
(BY SRI. RAJU S, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN SUB-DIVISION HASSAN – 573 201.
2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEY SETTLEMENT, HASSAN SUB-DIVISION, HASSAN TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN – 573 201.
3. THE TAHSILDAR HASSAN TALUK HASSAN – 573 201.
4. THE TALUKA SURVEYOR IN THE OFFICE OF TALUK ... PETITIONER OFFICE, HASSAN TALUK HASSAN – 573 201.
(BY SRI. Y.D. HARSHA, AGA) ... RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CERTIFY AND APPROVE THE CONCLUDED FILE OF EXECUTING PHODI AND DURASTI WORK CONCLUDED AND PLACED BEFORE BY R-2 TO 4 AND FIX THE HUDBUST IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY BEARING SY NO.29/P1 MEASURING 3[THREE] ACRES 0-35 [THIRTY- FIVE] GUNTAS SITUATED AT HEGGADIHALLI VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN DISTRICT AS PER THE ANNEXURE-R AND ALSO THE REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONER VIDE ANENXURE-D.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though matter is listed for preliminary hearing by consent of learned Advocates appearing for parties it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Heard Sri.S.Raju, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and Sri.Y.D.Harsha, Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
3. Petitioner has been granted land measuring 3 Acres 35 guntas in Sy.No.29/P1 of Heggadihalli village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan District on 16.06.1995 as per Annexure-A and she sought for mutating the revenue records. Accordingly, vide M.R.No.3/2000-2001 revenue records came to be mutated in her name and same has been continued as on date as per RTC extracts -Annexures-B and C.
4. An application came to be submitted by petitioner on 06.12.2017 vide Annexure-D to 3rd respondent for carrying out phodi and durasthi work and for fixation of boundaries in respect of aforesaid property granted to her. Based upon which, notice came to be issued by the jurisdictional revenue surveyor to the petitioner to appear before the Revenue Inspector and sketch has been prepared by the surveyor as per Annexure-F and report also came to be submitted by the jurisdictional Revenue Inspector vide Annexure-J. Pursuant to same, revenue inspector -
respondent No.3 has intimated the second respondent by communication dated 20.02.2018- Annexure-H to carry out phodi work and to fix boundaries in respect of property claimed by her. Thereafter joint inspection came to be conducted and land surveyor attached to the office of the Tahsildar office, Hassan has conducted phodi and durasthi work and has forwarded the same to the jurisdictional Tahsildar by communication dated 03.08.2018-Annexure-P for certification.
5. However, grievance of the petitioner is, pursuant to said exercise having been undertaken by the revenue authority namely respondent Nos.2 to 4, first respondent herein has not authenticated or certified said surveyor’s report and sketch. Hence, petitioner is seeking for a writ of mandamus.
6. Having regard to the fact that respondent Nos.2 to 4 having undertaken phodi and durasthi work in respect of land in question and said records now pending before first respondent for being certified, there is no impediment for first respondent to examine the same and take steps in accordance with law.
Hence, I proceeding to pass the following:
ORDER (1) Writ petition is allowed in part.
(2) First respondent is directed to consider the communication dated 03.08.2018- Annexure-P and relevant records annexed there to and take steps expeditiously and at any rate with in an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
(3) First respondent on certifying the records, shall be communicate the same to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of such certification or decision taken thereon.
Ordered accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE RU
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sannamma W/O Sannathame Gowda vs The Assistant Commissioner And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
29 August, 2019
Judges
  • Aravind Kumar