IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL W.P.No. 838/2017 & W.P.Nos.2866-71/2017 (LR-RES) BETWEEN Y.S.BASAVARADHYA, S/O A.M.SIDDALINGA SASTRY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/A YEDIYUR VILLAGE, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 142. ... PETITIONER (By Sri N.SURENDRA KUMAR, ADV.) AND 1. THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01.
2. TAHASILDHAR, KUNIGAL, TUMKUR DIST.-572 130. ... RESPONDENTS (By Smt.B.P.RADHA, AGA) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT R2 TO MAKE OUT KATHA IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN RESEPCT OF SURVEY NOS. REFERRED IN THE LETTER FORWARDED BY THE REVENUE INSPECTOR TO TAHASILDAR PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D DATED 11.12.2016, THE FOLLOWING SYRVEY NOS.
(1) LAND MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 0.33+25+11 GUNTAS IN SURVEY NO.64; (2) LAND MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 0.12+17 GUNTAS IN SURVEY NO.66; (3) LAND MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 2 ACRE IN SURVEY NO.57; (4) LAND MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 0.14+0.7+35+10 GUNTAS IN SURVEY NO.57; (5) LAND MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 0.7 GUNTAS IN SYRVEY NO.3; (6) LAND MEASURING AN EXTENT OF 0.6 GUNTAS IN SURVEY NO.90; (7) LAND MEASURIGN AN EXTENT OF 1 ACRE 25 GUNTAS IN SURVEY NO.92; (8) 1 ACRE 38 GUNTAS IN SURVEY NOS.33/1. THE AFORESAID LANDS AT SL.NO.1 TO 7 SITAUTED AT YADIYUR VILLAGE, KUNIGAL TALUK AND SL.NO.8 SITUATED AT CHIKKAJJANAHALLI, AMRUTHUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, ON THE BASE OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LAND REFORMS APPELLATE AUTHORITY TUMKUR, IN LRF NO.48/88 DTD.2.8.1989 IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEX-A.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. Petitioner claims that he is the Archak of Yediyur Siddalingeshwara Temple. It is his case that his ancestors had applied for grant of occupancy rights as per the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in respect of certain bits of lands comprised in Sy.Nos.64, 66, 57, 3, 90 and 92 situated at Yediyur village. According to petitioner, Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Tumkur had passed an order in L.R.F.No.48/88 dated 02.08.1989 granting occupancy rights in respect of these lands in favour of petitioner.
2. Petitioner has filed a representation dated 26.10.2016 before the Tahsildar, Kunigal requesting him to effect katha in the name of petitioner based on the order passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Tumkur. According to petitioner, though certain proceedings were initiated by the Tahsildar on the representation submitted, he has not passed any order to effect katha in the name of petitioner in respect of the lands in question. That is how he has approached this Court seeking writ of mandamus.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate – Smt B.P.Radha and find that Tahsildar is required to consider the request made by petitioner in accordance with law after hearing all the affected persons including the temple.
4. At this stage, it is pointed out by the learned Additional Government Advocate that Annexure-B representation is addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur and unless the petitioner gives a representation to the Tahsildar who is the competent authority to effect changes in the revenue records petitioner cannot expect the Tahsildar to consider the said representation. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that indeed representation was given to the Tahsildar also.
5. However, as copy of representation addressed to the Tahsildar is not enclosed to the petition, petitioner is at liberty to submit one more representation to the Tahsildar within four weeks from today. If such application is submitted within four weeks, the Tahsildar shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner and other affected persons including the Temple as expeditiously as possible.
6. Writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VP