IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. N. SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.33357 OF 2016 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI RAMANJINAPPA S/O. LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT TRAHUNASE, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 56 (BY SRI. S. P. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. AJESH KUMAR, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE - 1, REP BY ITS SECRETARY ... PETITIONER 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K. G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 09 3. THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE NORTH (ADDITIONAL) TALUK, YALAHANKA BENGALURU - 560064 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. S. MAHANTESH, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONDUCT THE SURVEY AND PODI THE LAND SY.NO.87/P35 OF TARAHUNASE VILLAGE, BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL) TALUK AS PER THE REPRESENTATION DTD 25.7.2012 VIDE ANNEXURE-G.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This writ petition is for the relief of mandamus in directing the respondents to conduct survey and phodi of land bearing Sy.No.87/P35 of Tarahunase village, Bangalore North (Additional) Taluk, pursuant to representation dated 25.7.2012 vide Annexure-G.
2. Admittedly, the petitioner herein is claiming title to portion of land bearing Sy.No.87, which measured to an extent of 4 acres of Tarahunase village. It is stated that, the said extent was granted by the Tahsildar of Devanahalli Taluk vide order bearing No.LNSR (1) 459/1961-62 dated 8.3.1962 in favour of one Smt.Puttamma, who in turn, said to have sold it in favour of one Sri.K.S.Venkatachalaiah under registered sale deed dated 3.12.1974. Though the entire extent of 4 acres was purchased by said K.S.Venkatachalaiah, he sold 3 acres out of that in favour one Smt.Akkayyamma under a registered sale deed dated 15.10.1975 retaining 1 acre with him. The said Smt.Akkayyamma is said to have executed a Will in favour of the petitioner on 28.1.1988. By virtue of that the petitioner is claiming title to an extent of 3 acres in Sy.No.87 of Tarahunase village, which according to him is in his possession and cultivation.
3. In the meanwhile, it is stated that 3rd respondent – Tahsildar is said to have reported to Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru North (Additional) Taluk, stating that the land in question was Government Gomal land, that there are no documents to support and substantiate the grant of said land in favour of Smt.Puttamma. It is also stated that there was a proceedings before the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru North in No.RRT(2) N(A) CR.76/2008-09, wherein the petitioner is said to be the respondent. In the said enquiry proceedings, it is stated that title of Smt.Puttamma pursuant to grant made in her favour is confirmed and 3rd respondent – Tahsildar was directed to enter the name of petitioner in revenue documents vide order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner dated 8.8.2012 in the aforesaid RRT proceedings. It is in this background an application was filed seeking phodi of 3 acres from out of total 4 acres of land which was granted in favour of Smt.Puttamma.
4. The petitioner would bring to the notice of this Court that a representation was given to the respondents vide Annexure-G seeking conducting of phodi of land in question. In this regard, it is stated that there were correspondences between 2nd and 3rd respondents, wherein 2nd respondent vide communication dated 17.2.2014 in proceedings bearing No.LND.CR.379/2013-14 called upon the 3rd respondent – Tahsildar to produce the report. However, in the meanwhile, nothing happened. It is in this background, the present writ petition is filed.
5. The petitioner tried to impress upon this Court that the documents referred to in Annexure-E were sought to be produced by him. It is for the aforesaid reason, Mr.Mahesh Babu, Assistant Commissioner was directed to be present before the Court. He would state that based on inter office communication he had called upon the Tahsildar to produce the documents referred to in Annexure-E, which are the documents available in the office of the Tahsildar. That it is only after said documents are furnished, he could look into the matter. In any event, this Court find that, that cannot be a ground to keep the representation of the petitioner pending as all those aspects are required to be seen by the authorities ie., whether the grant in favour of Smt.Puttamma is genuine and if it is genuine, then if all the relevant documents are available in the record as observed in the earlier proceedings bearing No.RRT(2) N(A) CR.76/2008-09, keeping the application of the petitioner pending for years is nothing but a ruse to keep it on the back burner for extraneous consideration.
6. Therefore, this Court would observe that 2nd and 3rd respondents shall make sure that the requisite procedure should be followed, necessary verification shall be conducted and completed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the Contempt Court for non compliance of this order.
With such observations, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- Judge RD/nd