IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN WRIT PETITION No.21764/2012 (SC/ST) C/W WRIT PETITION Nos.21766/2012, 21768/2012, 21767/2012, 21765/2012 IN W.P. NO.21764/2012 BETWEEN:
SRI.CHENIGAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.
1(a) MOTTAMMA, W/O LATE CHENIGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 1(b) SEETHAMMA, D/O LATE CHENIGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT THERU BEEDHI, MALLAGAMANA DODDI, MARALAVADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
(BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI.RAM CHANDRA RAO R., S/O R.SATYANARAYANA, NO.107, 4TH CROSS, 41ST MAIN, BTM 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE.
... PETITIONERS DIRECTOR OF MERLINHAWK AEROSPACE PVT. LTD., NO.57/5, 6TH CROSS, TANK BUND ROAD, N.S.PALYA, BTM LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 076.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB – DIVISION, RAMANAGARA.
4. THE TAHSILDHAR, KANAKAPURA, KANAKAPURA TALUK.
5. SMT.G.VIJAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, W/O DR.G.KRISHNA RAO, R/AT NO.17, CHINNASWAMY, MUDALIAR ROAD, TASKER TOWN, BANGALORE – 51.
(BY SRI.S.GOVINDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, HCGP FOR R2 – R4;
... RESPONDENTS SRI.MEHTAR M AZZAM, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT – 2 VIDE ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., IN W.P. NO.21766/2012 BETWEEN:
SMT.THIMMAKKA, W/O MUTHAIAH, MALIGAMANA DOODI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
(BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. R. RAM CHANDRA RAO, S/O R.SATYANARAYANA, DIRECTOR OF MERLINHAWK AEROSPACE PVT. LTD., ... PETITIONER NO.57/5, 6TH CROSS, TANK BUND ROAD, N.S.PALYA, BTM LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 076.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB – DIVISION, RAMANAGARA.
4. THE TAHSILDHAR, KANAKAPURA, KANAKAPURA TALUK.
5. SMT.G.VIJAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, W/O DR.G.KRISHNA RAO, R/AT NO.17, CHINNASWAMY, MUDALIAR ROAD, TASKER TOWN, BANGALORE – 51.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.GOVINDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, HCGP FOR R2 – R4;
SRI.MEHTAR M AZZAM, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT – 2 VIDE ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., IN W.P. NO.21768/2012 BETWEEN:
SRI. ADHIGAIAH, S/O SHIVAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, MALIGAMANA DOODI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
(BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. R. RAM CHANDRA RAO, S/O R.SATYANARAYANA, DIRECTOR OF MERLINHAWK AEROSPACE PVT. LTD., NO.57/5, 6TH CROSS, TANK BUND ROAD, N.S.PALYA, BTM LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 076.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB – DIVISION, RAMANAGARA.
4. THE TAHSILDHAR, KANAKAPURA, KANAKAPURA TALUK.
... PETITIONER 5. SMT.G.VIJAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, W/O DR.G.KRISHNA RAO, R/AT NO.17, CHINNASWAMY, MUDALIAR ROAD, TASKER TOWN, BANGALORE – 51.
(BY SRI.S.GOVINDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, HCGP FOR R2 – R4;
... RESPONDENTS SRI.MEHTAR M AZZAM, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT – 2 VIDE ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., IN W.P. NO.21767/2012 BETWEEN:
SRI.CHICKMUTAIAH, S/O LATE MUNINAYAKA, MAJOR IN AGE MALIGAMANA DOODI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
(BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. R. RAM CHANDRA RAO, S/O R.SATYANARAYANA, DIRECTOR OF MERLINHAWK AEROSPACE PVT. LTD., NO.57/5, 6TH CROSS, TANK BUND ROAD, N.S.PALYA, BTM LAYOUT, ... PETITIONER 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 076.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB – DIVISION, RAMANAGARA.
4. THE TAHSILDHAR, KANAKAPURA, KANAKAPURA TALUK.
5. SMT.G.VIJAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, W/O DR.G.KRISHNA RAO, R/AT NO.17, CHINNASWAMY, MUDALIAR ROAD, TASKER TOWN, BANGALORE – 51.
(BY SRI.S.GOVINDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, HCGP FOR R2 – R4;
... RESPONDENTS SRI.MEHTAR M AZZAM, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT – 2 VIDE ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., IN W.P. NO.21765/2012 BETWEEN:
SRI.MUTHANAYAKA, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.
1(a) MADDURAMMA, W/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 1(b) SIDDAPPA, S/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 1(c) HONAMMA, D/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 1(d) SMT.GOWRAMMA, D/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 1(e) HONNAPPA, S/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 1(f) BHAGYA, D/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 1(g) GANGADHARA, S/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, 1(h) GANGARAJ, S/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 1(i) NAGARATHNAMMA, D/O LATE MUTHANAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT THERU BEEDHI, MALLAGAMANA DOODI, MARALAVADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR P1(A-I) AND:
1. A.G.KRISHNA SWAMY, S/O GOPAL SWAMY, NO.20, 14TH CROSS, 17TH A MAIN, J.P.NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RAMANAGARA SUB – DIVISION, RAMANAGARA.
4. THE TAHSILDHAR, KANAKAPURA, KANAKAPURA TALUK.
5. SMT.G.VIJAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, W/O DR.G.KRISHNA RAO, R/AT NO.17, CHINNASWAMY, MUDALIAR ROAD, TASKER TOWN, BANGALORE – 51.
(BY SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, HCGP FOR R2 – R4;
... RESPONDENTS SRI.MEHTAR M AZZAM, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT – 2 VIDE ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER In all these writ petitions, common set of facts and question of law is involved. Hence, all the petitions are clubbed together to pass common order in order to avoid repetition of facts and law.
2. These petitions are filed by the L.Rs of the grantee challenging the orders of the Deputy Commissioner in case (1) Nos LND.SC ST(A) 13/2009-10 dated 1.12.2010, (in W.P.No.21764/2012), (2) LND.SC ST(A) 11/2009-10 dated 1.12.2010, (in W.P.No.21765/2012, (3) LND.SC ST(A) 10/2009-10 dated 1.12.2010, (in W.P.No.21766/2012) (4) LND.SC ST(A) 4/2009-10 dated 1.12.2010, (in W.P.No.21767/2012), and (5) LND.SC ST(A) 13/2009-10 dated 1.12.2010, (in W.P.No.21768/2012) in reversing the orders passed by the Asst. Commissioner in (1) PTCL (K) 26/2006-07 dated 16.6.2009 ( in W.P.No. 21764/2012), (2) PTCL (K) 23/2006-07 dated 16.6.2009 (in WP No.21765/2012) (3) PTCL (K) 27/2006-07 dated 16.6.2009( in W.P.No. 21766/2012 (4) PTCL (K) 24/2006-07 dated 16.6.2009 (in WP. No.21767/2012 ) and (5) PTCL (K) 25/2006-07 dated 16.6.2009( in W.P.No.21768/2012).
3. By order dated 16.6.2009, the Asst. Commissioner (Respondent No.3) allowed the petitions filed by the L.Rs of the grantee and restored the lands U/s 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (prohibition of Transfer of certain land) Act, 1978 (for short ‘ACT’) . Aggrieved by the same, respondent No 4 filed an appeal before the the Deputy Commissioner Ramnagara who by his order dated 1.12.2010 after hearing arguments allowed the appeals and set aside the order passed by the Asst. Commissioner, Ramanagar Sub-division, Ramanagara dated 16.6.2009. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, the L.Rs of the grantee are before this Court in these petitions.
4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel on both the side as well as learned HCGP. The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that the lands in question were granted by the Government under fresh grant order in SC NO.2/41-42 dated 16.5.1942. Subsequently, the L.Rs of the grantee said to be sold the properties to third persons on various dates under different sale deeds. Thereafter, in 1987, after commencement of the PTCL Act which came into force on 01.01.1979, based upon the Act, the L.Rs of the grantee filed an application U/s 5 of the Act before the Asst. Commissioner, Ramanagar Sub-division, Ramanagara, contending that they are belong to ‘Beda’ community and produced the caste certificate before the Asst. Commissioner. Considering the documents, the learned Asst. Commissioner, conducted enquiry by issuing notice to the purchasers and subsequent purchasers, resumed and restored the land in favour of LRs of the grantee, by order dated 16.6.2009. The petitioners being aggrieved by the same approached the Deputy Commissioner in an appeal, by taking contention that the land in question was not at all granted to the persons belonging to SC and ST community. Even otherwise, the caste certificate produced before the Asst. Commissioner shows they belongs to ‘Bedara’ community which does not fall under the category of SC and ST. category. But the Deputy Commissioner without properly considering the documents allowed the appeal of the grantees and restored the lands back to them. Inspite of this they also produced the documents showing the list of castes, wherein the community ‘BEDA’ was not in the list of SC and ST. The case certificate was also produced before the Dy.Commissioner. After hearing the arguments addressed by the petitioner – respondent No.3, set aside the restoration order passed by the Asst. Commissioner on the ground that the lands were granted to these persons who are not belonging to ST community and PTCL will not attract for filing the application U/s 5 of the Act. Assailing the said order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, the L.Rs of the grantee are before this Court.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argued before this Court that all the grantees belong to BEDA community. Due to some mistake in the caste certificate issued by the Tahsidlar, they are mentioned as ‘BEDARU’. ‘BEDA’ community has been used as Bedaru by using plural sense and for all practical purpose, the petitioners are belong to ‘BEDA’ community which comes under SC and ST as per notification issued by Government. Without proper consideration, the Deputy Commissioner set aside the order of the Asst. Commissioner. During pendency of the case, this Court also directed the District Caste Verification committee to submit a report. As per the report of the Caste Verification Committee, it was revealed that the petitioners – grantees were belongs to ‘BEDA’ community but not ‘BEDARU’ community which falls under the category of persons belonging to ST community. Therefore, the learned counsel prays for setting aside the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner and restore the order of the Asst. Commissioner.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for Respondent No.5 Mr. Mehtar M. Azzam strenuously contended that there are documents along with objections, list of castes showing the caste ‘BEDARU’ which falls under OBC category but not SC and ST category. The caste certificate – Annexure B produced by the grantee itself shows that they are belongs to ‘BEDARU’ community which does not come under ST community which was considered by the Deputy Commissioner while passing the impugned order and he supports the Deputy Commissioner’s order and prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
7. Learned High Court Govt.Pleader Smt Savithramma submitted that as per the direction of the Court, the Caste Verifying Committee of the District submitted a report before the Court which reveals that BEDA community belongs to ST as per the Government notification under schedule list mentioned thereunder and BEDA community is under ST under Chapter II of the Act, therefore, it is clear from the enquiry made by the Caste Verification Committee that the petitioners belong to ‘BEDA’ which falls under the categories of SC and ST, and land grant would attract Section 3 of ‘Act’ and therefore, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner is requires to be set aside.
8. However, the learned counsel for R-5 contended that the caste verification report filed by the verification committee consists of Deputy Commissioner, Deputy Director of Zilla Panchayath, the Tahsidlar, Kanakapura, and Survey officer but there is no research scholar of ST people joined in the Verification Committee as per the judgment of the Apex Court. Therefore, the verification report shall not be accepted for considering that the petitioners belong to ST community.
9. The learned Govt. pleader also contended that the land in question has been grant to SC and ST with free of cost and the sale deed took place after commencement of the Act as on 1.1.1979.
10. Upon considering the arguments of learned counsel for both the parties and learned HCGP and on perusal of the records, admittedly the lands in question were granted to the persons shown under Annexure C as on 16.5.1942. There were 40 persons mentioned. All these persons were granted 4 acres each under the heading which was shown as ‘Free Grant’. In the first Govt. Notification, which came into force with effect from 27.7.1977, BEDA community was shown as persons belonging to ST under schedule. But the documents produced by the very grantee before the Asst.Commissioner along with the certificate issued by the Tahsildar which goes to show that their caste was shown as ‘BEDARU’. Admittedly as per Schedule of Central list of OBC for Karnataka, ‘BEDARU’ caste is shown as OBC and not ST category. But the Asst. Commissioner in his order has stated that the grantees belongs to the ‘BEDA' community and the Asst. Commissioner has come to the conclusion on the basis of the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar that the grantees are belong to SC and ST community. But according to Respondent No.5, the grantees belong to ‘BEDARU’ community which comes under ‘OBC’ in the Central List. But table 2 of the schedule of the Government of Karnataka Part VI dated 27.7.1977, the ‘BEDARU’ community is not included in the SC and ST list.. Such being the case, the Asst. Commissioner jumped into wrong conclusion that the grantees are belong to ST and ST community which is against their own documents produced by the grantees showing the caste as ‘BEDARU. Therefore, the Deputy Commissioner has rightly held in his order that ‘BEDARU’ community would not fall under SC and ST community and therefore, he set aside the order. However, in view of the direction issued by this Court and submission of the report by the caste verification committee of District,, it is revealed that all these petitioners, original grantee and ancestors were belongs to ‘BEDA’ community but not ‘BEDARU’ community. They also made enquiry by obtaining documents from the school authorities where the ancestors were studied and they gave a report confirming that they belong to ‘BEDA’ community. However, this Court cannot go into enquiring the case on the application filed by the petitioner for granting land. It is the duty of the Asst. Commissioner U/s 5(1) of the Act to make necessary enquiry by looking into all the documents including caste certificate grant order and whether the lands granted to ST and SC persons fall under Section 3(1)(b) of PTCL Act and whether any ban for non-alienation clause mentioned therein requires to be considered. But while passing the order by the Asst. Commissioner not considered all these points and the Deputy Commissioner based on the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the subsequent purchasers came to the conclusion that ‘BEDARU’ community is not coming under SC and ST category.
Therefore, both the orders passed by the Asst. Commissioner as well as Deputy Commissioner requires to be set aside and the matter requires to be remitted back to the Asst. Commissioner for fresh consideration by considering records and to make necessary enquiry in respect of the reports submitted by the Caste Verification Committee of the District and to consider the caste certificate produced by the grantees showing their caste as ‘BEDRAU’ and requires to give proper finding in respect of the caste based upon Annexure A in Central list for OBC for Karnataka and the caste certificate – Annexure B of the grantees in connection with the report submitted in light of the report submitted by the District Caste Verification committee after striking out the Adikarnataka coming under SC or ST, and whether the grantees belong to ‘BEDA’ community comes under SC & ST or OBC category, should be considered by the Asst. Commissioner and other relevant documents in order to come to the conclusion that whether the grantees come under ‘BEDA’ OR ‘BEDARAU’ community by making enquiry in connection with the report of the verification committee and thereafter pass necessary orders by giving finding as to whether the alleged lands were granted to SC/ST people and the sale effected subsequent to commencement of the Act as on 1.1.1979, which prohibits the alienation.
Accordingly, all these writ petitions are allowed. The impugned orders of Deputy Commissioner and Asst. Commissioner are set aside and the matters are remitted back to Asst. Commissioner for fresh consideration and both the parties are directed to appear before the Asst. Commissioner on 11.11.2019 at 2.30 p.m. without further notice from the authority. The authorities to conduct enquiry U/s 5A and 5(1) of Act in light of the enquiry report and also the documents produced by the purchasers. All the contentions of both the parties are kept open. The authorities should dispose of the matter within six months commencing from 11.11.2019.
Parties to bear their own costs.
*NM SD/-
JUDGE