IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NOs.54770-54771 OF 2016 [KLR-RES] BETWEEN:
VIDYA MANASA EDUCATION TRUST REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. BHAGYA N.H., W/O. SRI. SHADAKSHARI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.25, ASHIRVADA APARTMENT, HIGH GROUNDS BENGALURU – 560 001 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.C. JAYAKIRTHI, ADV ) AND:
1 THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU – 560 001 2 SRI. CHIKKAMUNISWAMY S/O. LATE THOTI MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS MULLURU VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT – 560 040 3 SRI. MADAPPA S/O. LATE GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS MULLURU VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT – 560 040 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.S. MAHANTESH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. SURESH S. LOKRE, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3] THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF R-1 PERTAINING TO THE GRANT DATED 28.02.2004 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AT ANNEX-B; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.05.2016 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.659/2008 AND 660/2008 AT ANNEXURE-G.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner herein is impugning the order dated 28.02.2004 passed in LND:ECR:85:03-04 which is at Annexure-B and also seeking quashing of order dated 13.05.2016 passed by Karnataka Appellate Tribunal [‘Tribunal’, for short] in Appeal Nos.659 and 660/2008 vide Annexure-G.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of these writ petitions are as under:
Petitioner is an Educational Trust which is said to have secured lease of 8 acres of land in Sy. No.48 of Mulluru Village, Varthur Hobli, presently, Bengaluru East Taluk [earlier Bengaluru South Taluk]. It is stated that lease was made in its favour on 28.02.2004 and thereafter lease deed was also executed on 6.3.2004. The same was challenged by respondent Nos.2 and 3 in this proceedings contending that they are owners of aforesaid extent of 8 acres which according to them was granted in their favour. The challenge to the said lease is in Revenue Appeal Nos.659/2008 and 660/2008 on the file of the Tribunal, came to be allowed and the lease made in favour of the petitioner with respect to aforesaid 8 acres of land is cancelled. The said order is subject matter of these writ petitions.
3. When these proceedings were taken up for consideration at the stage of preliminary hearing as requested by learned counsel for the petitioner, original grant records was summoned to ascertain whether grant was really made in favour of respondents 2 and 3 herein. In response to order passed by this Court on 8.4.2019, learned Additional Government Advocate secured original records bearing No.LND.SR.316/1960-61 dated 21.01.1963 which would clearly indicate grant of 4 acres of land in Sy. No.48 of Mullur Village, Varthur Hobli, the then Bengaluru South Taluk in favour of each of respondents 2 and 3 herein. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order passed by the Tribunal in Revenue Appeal Nos.659 and 660 of 2008 in canceling the lease granted in favour of the petitioner herein is just and proper and the same does not call for interference. Accordingly, writ petitions are dismissed.
4. However, at this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner would bring to the notice of this court, that the total extent of land available in Sy. No.48 is 10 acres 11 guntas as stated in ground No.[d] of the writ petitions, wherein it is stated that remaining 2 acres 11 guntas also is not considered in favour of the petitioner which is a registered Trust running an educational institution.
5. While dismissing the writ petitions, this Court would reserve liberty to the petitioner to pursue the lease of aforesaid extent of land if the same is available with the Government, if the same is already not being granted in favour of any other person by the Government. With such observation, the main prayer in challenge to the order of the Tribunal is hereby dismissed.
6. In view of the writ petitions being dismissed, confirming the order passed by the Tribunal in Revenue Appeal Nos.659 and 660 of 2008, the revenue entries of 8 acres of land, shall be restored in favour of respondent nos.2 & 3 to an extent of 4 Acres in the name of each of them as it stood earlier.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-