IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.24890 OF 2018 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN:
SMT. VENKUBAI W/O LATE VENKOBARAO, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT FORT, HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE – 562 114, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. A. MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADV.,) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, VISVESHWARAIAH TOWER, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
3. THE TAHSILDAR HOSKOTE TALUK, HOSKOTE – 562 114.
(BY SRI. VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 26.10.2015 PASSED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNEXURE-N AND TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO RESTORE THE MUTATION ENTRY IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN KHATHA AND RTC IN RESPECT OF 1-36 ACRE AND GUNTAS IN SY. NO.265 OF HOSAKOTE KASABA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AS EXISTED PRIOR TO 1988 AS PER ANNEXURE-C.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This writ petition is filed seeking quashing of endorsement No.RRT[K]CR:68/2015-16 dated 26.10.2015 vide Annexure-N and also for a writ of mandamus, directing Respondent No.3, namely, Tahsildar of Hosakote Taluk to restore khata of land bearing Sy. No.265 measuring 1 acre 36 guntas of Hosakote Kasaba, Bengaluru Rural District, in the name of the petitioner.
2. The case of the petitioner is that she is grantee of aforesaid extent of land and pursuant to the grant made in her favour, the entries are registered in her name in the record of rights and consequently RTC also issued in her name from the years 1984 to 1989. It is her grievance that subsequently her name has been removed from RTC.
3. It is also contended that possession of the aforesaid land with the petitioner is not in dispute, in as much as, petitioner had filed a suit earlier in O.S. No.574/1979 for an order of permanent injunction against the State. Though the suit was dismissed, in an appeal filed in R.A. No.48/1981, she has secured an order of permanent injunction by Judgment and decree dated 17.10.1981, which according to her, is continuing undisturbed.
4. It is also stated that proceedings were initiated for removal of khata from her name, in the meanwhile, an order was passed by the respondents granting an area measuring 100 ft x 100 ft belonging to the petitioner in favour of Social Welfare Department for construction of Hospital. The same was subject matter of challenge by the petitioner before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.1126/2004, which came to be allowed by Order dated 2.12.2011. With this, possession of the petitioner to the aforesaid extent of land is confirmed, therefore, revenue entries are also to be restored in her name. It is in this background, the present writ petition is filed.
5. In this matter, this Court directed the Tahsildar of Hosakote Taluk to be present before the Court along with original records available in the said office with reference to the land in Sy. No.265 of Hosakote Kasaba. It is in response to the order of this Court, Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk is present before the Court on more than one occasion along with RTC book which is maintained with reference to land bearing Sy. No.265 of the village from the years 1984-85 to 1988-89 and also mutation entry register available in the said office. Meanwhile, the petitioner was also directed to produce the original of saguvali chit, which, is not produced, inspite of granting sufficient opportunity.
6. Hence, this matter was heard, with the available records. When the mutation register is looked into, at page No.64, there are three mutation entries, M.R. No.1/1969-70 which is with reference to land bearing Sy. Nos.113 and 114. Mutation Entry No.2/1969-70 is with reference to Sy. Nos.111 and 112. When handwriting in these two aforesaid entries are seen, it appears to be of the same person. Insofar as Mutation Entry No.3/1969-70 is concerned, it appears to be in a different handwriting. It is seen in page No.65 where it should have continued as No.4/1969-70, instead, MR No.3/1969-70 is mentioned in the said page as first entry, thereby giving an indication of insertions into the mutation entry register. If the RTC book which is produced is seen, with reference to Sy. No.265, there appears to be tampering with page number and there is no reference to any order being passed for entering the name of Smt. Venkubai in the RTC register when compared to other entries in the said proceedings.
7. In the instant case, there is no order passed by any competent authority directing registering of the name of Smt. Venkubai in the Mutation Register and Record of Right. With this, what could be understood is that grant as well as non production of original grant certificate is not proved to be genuine in any proceedings. It is on the basis of this false entries, injunction order appears to be taken in R.A.No.48/1981 and based on that, she has also secured an order in Appeal No.1126/2004 on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru.
8. Barring these two, there is nothing on record to demonstrate that Smt. Venkubai is granted 1 acre 36 guntas of land in Sy. No.265 of Hosakote Kasaba, Bengaluru Rural District. In the background of original record not being available and there being an insertion in the original records by persons who are not authorized to make such entries, the same cannot be accepted.
9. Hence, the prayer of the petitioner to issue direction to Respondent No.3 to restore her name in the RTC which was available between the years 1984 to 1989 cannot be considered. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-