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

Sri Nagaraju And Others vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|15 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NOs.11892-11895/2018(KLR-REG) BETWEEN 1. SRI NAGARAJU S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT MAHANTH LINGAPURA VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-560106 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT 2. SRI. MUNINAGAPPA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT KARAKALAGHATA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-560106 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
3. SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT KARAKALAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-560106 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
4. SRI.RAMASWAMY REDDY S/O LATE MUNISWAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT SOPPAHALLI VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-560 106 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI FAYAZ SAB B.G, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE-560 009 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVANA, BANGALORE-560 009 4. THE TAHASILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL TOWN-560 106, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
5. THE TAHASILDAR & SECRETARY COMMITTEE FOR REGULARIZATION OF UNAUTHORIZED CULTIVATION OF LANDS, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL - 560 106 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.VENKATESH DODDERI, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF PETITIONERS AND TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS IN THE NATURE OF DIRECTION OR ORDER DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION ANNEXURES- B1 TO B4 SUBMITTED IN FORM No.53 / 50 BY THE PETITIONERS FOR GRANT/REGULARIZATION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPATION OF RESPECTIVE PORTIONS OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN SY.48, MEASURING 2 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, SITUATED AT MAHANTH LINGAPURA VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-560106, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, IMMOVABLE PROPERTY BEARING SY.112 MEASURING 2 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, SITUATED AT CHIKKAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK-560 106, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, IMMOVABLE PROPERTY BEARING SY.112 MEASURING 1 ACRE AND 20 GUNTAS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, SITUATED AT CHIKKAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK-560 106, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, LAND IN SY.36, MEASURING 0-20 GUNTAS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, SITUATED AT SOPPAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-560 106, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, AS CONSIDERED IN OTHER SIMILARLY PLACED CASE AS PER THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2015 PASSED IN W.P.NOs.48638-48640/2014, WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
2. Petitioners are seeking writ of mandamus to respondents, to consider their applications in Form No.53 / 50 vide Annexure ‘B1’ to ‘B4’ to the petitions, for grant / regularization of unauthorized occupation of their respective land, details of which is stated in the ensuing para No.3, as was considered in respect of similarly placed persons as per the order dated 15.07.2015 (Annexure ‘E’ to the petitions) passed in W.P. Nos.48638-48640/2014. They have also sought for direction to the respondents to enter their names in column Nos.9 and 12 of computerized RTC and Mutation Register in respect of the respective land in their unauthorized occupation.
3. It is stated that petitioner No.1 is in unauthorized cultivation and possession of the land measuring to an extent of 02 Acres in Sy. No.48 situate at Mahanth Lingapura village, Jigani hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District. Similarly, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are said to be in unauthorized cultivation and possession of lands measuring 02 Acres and 01 Acre 20 guntas respectively in Sy. No.112 situate at Chikkahosahalli village, Anekal Taluk. Petitioner No.4 is said to be in unauthorized cultivation and possession of 20 guntas of land in Sy. No.36 situate at Soppahalli village, kasaba hobli, Anekal Taluk.
4. Petitioners herein are claiming themselves to be persons in unauthorized occupation and cultivation of their respective land. Perusal of Annexures ‘B1’ to ‘B4’ to the petitions discloses that the said applications were filed by Sri Nagaraja / Nagaraju (petitioner No.1), Ramaswamy Reddy (petitioner No.4), Muninagappa / Muniningappa (petitioner No.2) and Krishnappa (petitioner No.3) in Tahasildar office, Anekal Taluk on 01.08.1991, 02.12.1998, 11.11.1998 and 02.07.1991 respectively. Petitioner No.1 – Nagaraja / Nagaraju, who has stated his age as 25 years in the application vide Annexure ‘B1’ to the petition claimed that he was unauthorizedly cultivating his land since 20 years next before the date of his application. Similarly, Ramaswamy Reddy, Muniningappa / Muninagappa and Krishnappa, who have stated their age as ’45 years’, ’42 years’ and ’35 years’ respectively in their applications vide Annexures ‘B2’, ‘B3’ and ‘B4’ to the petition claim to be in unauthorized cultivation of their respective land since 20 years, 35 years and 10 years next before the date of their respective application. This clearly indicates that petitioners have come up with false and frivolous applications.
5. In any event, the applications and the contents therein would not infuse any confidence in this Court to believe that they are genuine.
6. In the meanwhile, learned Additional Government Advocate would bring to the notice of this Court that the land/s in respect of which petitioners herein have sought regularization of their unauthorized cultivation by filing applications in Form No.50 / Form No.53 fall within 18 Kilometers from the Corporation limits of Bengaluru. Therefore, the said lands cannot be considered for grant / regularization.
7. In that view of the matter, these Writ Petitions do not merit consideration. Accordingly, they are rejected.
8. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE sma Sma
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

Sri Nagaraju And Others vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
15 February, 2019
Judges
  • S N Satyanarayana