IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.51318 OF 2016 (GM-WAKF) BETWEEN:
1. SRI VEERABHADRAIAH S/O LATE SRIKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESIDENTS OF HOOLIKUNTE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT- 572129.
2. SRI S RUDAIAH S/O LATE SRIKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDENTS OF HOOLIKUNTE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT -572129.
3. SRI H S SHIVANNA S/O LATE SRIKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDENTS OF HOOLIKUNTE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT- 572129.
4. SRI H S GANGADHARAIAH S/O LATE SRIKANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDENTS OF HOOLIKUNTE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572129.
(By Mr. GIRISH M K, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR – 572101.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KORATAGERE SUB DIVISION KORATAGERE TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572129.
4. THE THASILDAR KORATAGERE TUMKUR DISTRICT -572129.
5. DISTRICT WAKF OFFICER TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR -572101.
(By Mr. VIJAY KUMAR A PATIL, ADV. FOR R1-R4 Mr. SYED SUHAIL, ADV. FOR R5) - - -
… PETITIONERS … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD:14.5.2016 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-G IN SO FAR AS SURVEY NO.171 OF HULIKUNTE VILLAGE, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT AT SERIAL NO.2 IN THE ENCLOSURE TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE R-4 TO CANCEL THE M.R.NO.H57/2014-15 DTD:29.6.2015, AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Girish M.K., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Mr.Syed Suhail, learned counsel for respondent No.5.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has assailed the validity of the communication dated 14.05.2015 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, in which Deputy Commissioner has informed the Tahsildar to update the Record of Rights of Wakf property in Koratagere Taluk.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that his property is included in the aforesaid communication which he has purchased by way of a registered sale deed. He further submitted that the impugned order has been passed in flagrant violation of principles of natural justice as the same will have effect of deletion of his name from Revenue Records and neither any notice nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted that in the absence of any challenge to the Notification by which the property of the petitioner has been notified as Wakf property, no substantial relief can be granted to the petitioner as the respondent No.5 remains the owner of the property in question. However, it is fairly submitted by him that no opportunity of hearing is afforded to the petitioner and therefore before effecting any change in the Revenue Records, the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 shall be heard.
5. In view of the submissions made and taking into account the submission made by the learned Government Advocate, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that before making any change in the revenue records, an opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 and thereafter, the competent authority shall pass an appropriate order with regard to mutation of the property in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ss