IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.58590 OF 2017 (LB - RES) AND WRIT PETITION No.17024/2018 Between:
1. Sri. H.V. Lokesh, S/o. H. K. Venkataiah, Aged about 36 years.
2. Shivalingamma W/o. Late Venkataiah, Aged about 66 years.
Both are R/o. Huligerepura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya - 571 428. ... Petitioners (By Sri. G.M. Ananda, Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka, Department of Panchayath Raj and Rural Devlopment, M.S. Building, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560 001.
Represented by its Secretary.
2. The Zilla Panchayath, Mandya District, Mandya – 571 401. Represented by its Chief Executive Officer.
3. The Taluk Panchayath, Maddur Taluk, Maddur, Mandya District – 571 428. Represented by its Chief Executive Officer.
4. Nagarakere Grama Panchayath, Nagarakere, Kasaba Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District – 571 428. Represented by its Secretary/Development Officer.
5. Sri. H.K. Shivanna S/o. Kadegowda, Major, Huligerepura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District - 571 428. ... Respondents (By Smt. B.P. Radha, AGA for R1;
Sri. B.J. Somayaji, Advocate for R2 to R4; Smt. Archana Murthy P., Advocate for R5 ) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the R-4 to follow its resolution at Annexure-A dated 14.02.2011 and order to continue khata and Demand Register as issued earlier at Annexures-C and D and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioners have sought for a direction against respondent No.4 to continue khata entry into the name of the petitioners pertaining to property bearing No.113/B, Janger No.113/B and Janger No.399 relating to property bearing No.113/C.
2. The petitioners state that they have derived interest over the said property by way of inheritance.
3. It is stated that the Gram Panchayat on an earlier occasion had effected khata into the name of the petitioners in M.R.No.14/2005-06 pursuant to a resolution of the Gram Panchayat dated 29.04.2005. The said resolution is stated to have been challenged before the Adhyaksha, Taluk Panchayat by respondent No.5 under Section 237 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (‘the Act’ for brevity).
4. On its dismissal, the matter was taken up in the appeal before the Adhyaksha, Zilla Panchayat by respondent No.5. On the said appeal being allowed, the petitioners had filed W.P.No.39867/2012 challenging the orders. The said Writ Petition came to be allowed, while observing that the order at Annexure-E dated 22.03.2012 passed by the Adhyaksha, Taluk Panchayat as well as the order passed by the Adhyaksha, Zilla Panchayat were without jurisdiction, while granting liberty to respondent No.5 to challenge the revenue entries as well as the resolution of the Gram Panchayat by taking recourse to an appeal under Section 269 of the Act or to file an appropriate civil suit.
5. The petitioners state that no action was initiated as regards the resolution dated 29.04.2005 or M.R.No.14/2005-06 till an appeal has been filed in case No.8/2018 before the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Maddur under Section 269 of the Act. It is contended that in the absence of any order staying the resolution dated 29.04.2005 or the Mutation as per M.R. No.14/2005-06, the entry in favour of the petitioners are required to be restored.
6. Heard learned counsel on both the sides.
7. It is clear and undisputed that the resolution dated 29.04.2005 of the Gram Panchayat as well as the Mutation in M.R.No.14/2005-06 has not been set-aside till date.
8. This Court while disposing of Writ Petition No.39867/2012 dated 04.04.2013 has clearly observed that the order at Annexure-E dated 22.03.2012 as well as the order of the Adyaksha, Zilla Panchayat dated 10.08.2012 passed in appeal No.58/2011-12 were without jurisdiction. In the light of the same, there should be an automatic restoration of the entry, i.e.
M.R. No.14/2005-06 in the name of the petitioners.
9. It is to be noticed that an entry came to be interfered with in the intervening proceedings and intervening proceedings are declared to be without jurisdiction. Accordingly, respondent No.4 is directed to restore the entry in M.R.No.14/2005-06 standing in the name of the petitioners.
10. However, it is made clear that in light of the submission of the learned counsel for respondent No.5 that an appeal has been filed. The said entry could be subject to appeal and consequential proceedings initiated by respondent No.5.
11. It is needless to state that if any interim order is passed in the appeal or other proceedings as regards the entry in favour of the petitioners or the resolution of the Gram Panchayat, the same would require to be taken note of. The restoration ought to be effected forthwith, not later than four weeks from the date of release of this order.
Subject to the above observations, these petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SJK