IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA Writ Petition No. 865 OF 2017 (KLR-RES) Between:
Sri. P. Narayanaswamy S/o late Pillappa, Aged about 54 years, R/at: 1st Main, 2nd Cross, Adarsha Nagar, Malur Town – 563 130, Kolar District.
(By Sri. Y.R. Sadasivareddy, Senior Counsel for Sri. Deepak J., Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka Represented by its Secretary Revenue Department, M.S. Building, Dr. Ambedkar Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Deputy Commissioner Kolar District, Kolar – 563 101.
... Petitioner 3. Technical Assistant and Deputy Director of Land Records, Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar – 563 101.
4. The Tahasildhar Malur Taluk, Malur – 563 130.
5. Sri. Ramesh S/o late Muniappa, Aged about 48 years, 6. Venkatarama S/o late Muniyappa, Aged about 44 years, Respondents No.5 and 6 both are R/at: No.67, Byrathi, Dodda Gubbi Post, Bengaluru – 560 077. … Respondents (By Smt. Pramodini Kishan, AGA for R-1 to R-4; Sri. Prakash T. Hebbar, Advocate for R-5 and R-6) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 13.07.2016 in Revision No.02/2014-15 passed by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-F and to quash the order dated 13.05.2014 passed by the respondent No.3 vide Annexure-E and confirm the order passed by the Tahsildar dated 06.10.2000 vide Annexure - D and etc., This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner filed the present writ petition to issue writ of certiorari by quashing the order dated 13.07.2016 made in Revision No.02/2014-15 passed by the 2nd respondent as per Annexure – F and also to quash the order dated 13.05.2014 made in No.DDLR/Appeal-39/2013-14 passed by the 3rd respondent as per Annexure – E and confirm the order passed by the Tahsildar dated 06.10.2000 vide Annexure – D and to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.4 to issue notices to both the parties and measure the entire land and also verified the Special Deputy Commissioner order and effect the phodi in respect of lands belonging to petitioner as well as respondents No.5 and 6.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.no.119 of Bhavanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Malur Taluk for an extent of 4 acres 38 guntas. Originally the land bearing Sy.no.119 of Bhavanahalli Village measuring about 190 acres belongs to State Government which is a Gomal Land. The landless persons unauthorizedly cultivating several acres of land in Sy.no.119 as such, the petitioner was also cultivating an extent of 4 acres 38 guntas since from 1983. When the land grant rules came into force the petitioner made an application before the Land Grant Committee for regularization of his authorized cultivation for an extent of 4 acres 38 guntas.
3. The Land Grant Committee after visiting the spot and holding detailed enquiry found that the petitioner was in possession of 4 acres 38 guntas and accordingly by its order dated 13.04.1992 granted the land for an extent of 4 acres 38 guntas in favour of the petitioner. The same was referred to the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar for approval. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner by order dated 28.06.1993 confirmed the unauthorized occupation of the petitioner.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner that respondents No.5 and 6 claiming to be the purchasers of 15 acres 30 guntas in Sy.no.239 from one T.Muniyappa. The said T.Muniyappa had purchased the same from Ramanjunappa and Ramanjunappa purchased the one from Gopal Singh vide registered sale deed dated 10.05.1971 wherein the extent of land is mentioned as 15 acres. Further it is submitted that Gopal Singh claim to be the owner of 15 acres 30 guntas in Sy.no.119 said to have been granted by Special Deputy Commissioner for Inam Abolition, Kolar on 30.07.1968 and subsequently they have obtained a new number i.e. Sy.no.239 by way of phodi. It is further claimed that while making dhurasth (phodi) an extent of 2 acres 11 guntas out of 4 acres 38 guntas granted in favour of the petitioner included in the said dhurasth and made attempts to dispossess the petitioner from the land for an extent of 2 acres 11 guntas.
5. On verification, the petitioner came to know that there is mistake therefore, the petitioner made representation to the Tahsildar in the year 1999. The Tahsildar considering the entire material on record by order dated 06.10.2000 directed to make dhurasth in favour of the petitioner to an extent of 2 acres 11 guntas in Sy.no.239/2 and remain extent of 2 acres 27 guntas to be phoded in Sy.no.119. The said order was subject matter of the appeal before the 3rd respondent - Deputy Director of Land Records filed by respondents No.5 and 6 and the 3rd respondent by impugned order dated 13.05.2014 allowed the appeal and the Hissa Phodi dated 25.11.2000 was cancelled.
6. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar in Revision No.02/2014-15. The Deputy Commissioner after hearing both the parties, by the order dated 13.07.2016 dismissed the appeal and the dhurasth made in Sy.no.119 dated 05.01.1989 is retained and cancelled the phodi made in Sy.no.119, New No.247 and directed the Tahsildar to issue notice to both the parties and fresh phodi to be made. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
7. I have heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
8. After arguing the matter at length, Sri.Prakash T.Hebbar learned counsel appearing for respondents No.5 and 6 submitted that the petitioner / plaintiff has already filed suit in O.S.No.1/2017 for declaration of his title and for permanent injunction in respect of Sy.no.119, New No.119/P27 measuring 4 acres 38 guntas situated at Bhavanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Malur Taluk. The same is not disputed by Sri.Y.R.Sadasivareddy, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. When the suit is pending
schedule property more fully described in the plaint to the suit.
9. In view of the above, the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Assistant Commissioner, Tahsildar and Deputy Commissioner is always subject to result of the suit pending between the parties and any decree to be passed by the Civil Court shall be binding on the parties as well as revenue authorities / respondent authorities. The parties are directed to maintain status quo as on today and it is always open for the parties to approach appropriate forum at the appropriate stage, for redressal of their grievance after disposal of the suit.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE UN