IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.28505 OF 2019 (KLR-LG) BETWEEN:
SRI. P.S. SANJIVA S/O SRI. P.K. SHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS NEAR TELEPHONE EXCHANGE B.M. ROAD, PERIYAPATNA TOWN MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 301.
(BY SRI. SANJEEV B.L, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSORE DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU – 570 001.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HUNSUR SUB-DIVISION HUNSUR – 571 105.
... PETITIONER 4. THE TAHSILDAR PERIYAPATNA TALUK PERIYAPATNA – 571 107.
(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-2 TO GRANT THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY TO THE PETITIONER AS PER RULE 4[2] OF KARNATAKA LAND GRANT RULES, 1969 AS SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER IN HIS REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE R-2 ON 16.02.2019 VIDE ANENXURE-B 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. Sri. Y.D. Harsha, learned AGA has been directed to take notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. Petitioner is seeking for a writ of mandamus to direct second respondent to grant the property bearing Sy.No.27/2 measuring 2 acres 4 guntas situated at Giruru Village, Periyapatna Taluk, Mysore District as per Rule 4(2) of Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969, by considering his representation dated 16.02.2019-Annexure-B in his favour.
3. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records it would disclose that petitioner has purchased 4 acres of land in Sy.No.27 of Giruru Village, Periyapatna Taluk and adjacent land measuring 2 acres 4 guntas, which is a government land, petitioner is said to be in possession of said land and cultivating the same from past 25 years and as such representation has been submitted by the petitioner to second respondent on 16.02.2009 – Annexure-D seeking grant of said property namely, property morefully described in the Schedule to the petition.
4. Fourth respondent has submitted report to third respondent on 07.10.2013-Annexure-E, whereunder it has recommended for grant of schedule property in favour of petitioner. On receipt of said representation, third respondent has visited the spot and verified the records and has submitted its recommendations by way of report dated 27.04.2015 vide Annexure-F recommending thereunder for grant of land in question in favour of petitioner. However, second respondent has not taken any steps in this regard for grant of said land. In other words, representation dated 16.02.2009 – Annexure-B submitted by petitioner to second respondent has not been disposed of till date. Taking into consideration the recommendations made by respondent Nos.3 and 4, second respondent is required to take decision on said representation in that regard expeditiously, which has not been done.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed in-part.
(ii) A writ of mandamus is issued to second respondent to consider and dispose of representation dated 16.02.2009-
Annexure-B submitted by petitioner expeditiously.
(iii) However, it is made clear that issuance of this writ to consider representation shall not be construed or understood by second respondent as writ of mandamus to allot or grant the land in question to petitioner and second respondent would be at liberty to consider the claim of petitioner independently by taking into account recommendations made by respondent Nos.3 and 4.
Learned AGA is permitted to file memo of appearance within four (4) weeks.
SD/- JUDGE DR