Back
V. GOPALA GOWDA. J.
GIRIJAMMA Appellant
versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS Respondent
Writ Petition No. 33297 of 2001 (LR).
Decided on 11th March, 2005
Cases Referred: AIR 1987 SC 1578; ILR Kar 4693.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961-Applicability of PTCL Act -Section 61 -Applicability of P.T C L Act - Land granted under the Act - Alienation of - Provisions of PTCL Act not applicable.
Constitution of India -Articles 226 and 227 -Alternate remedy - Restoration of land under Section 61 (3) of Karnataka Land Reforms Act - Alternate remedy of appeal under Section 118 of the Act available to the aggrieved - Hence, Writ Petition dismissed with liberty avail such remedy.
Cases Referred: AIR 1987 SC 1578; ILR Kar 4693.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Section 118 - Appeal remedy - Order of restoration under Section 61 - Aggrieved has the remedy of appeal under.
Cases Referred: AIR 1987 SC 1578; ILR Kar 4693.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Section 48-A - Fifteen years of non-alienation period for purposes of Section 61(1) - Computation of. See, Section 61(1).
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Section 61 (1) - Period of fifteen years - Computation of - Should be computed from the date of final order passed by the tribunal.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Section 61 (3) - Remedy against an order under - Alienation of land within fifteen years - Order of restoration passed under the section - Aggrieved person has a right of appeal under Section 118 of the Act.
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Section 61 Constitutional Validity of - No more res integra in view of the decision of Apex Court in AIR 1987 SC 1578 - It is upheld.
The constitutional validity of Section 61 of the Karnataka Land Reforn1s Act, 1961, is no longer res integra in view of the Constitutional Bench decision of the Apex Court in the case of H.S. Srinivas Raghavachar v State of Karnataka, wherein the validity of Act No.1 of 1974 is upheld. Hence, the contentions urged in this regard cannot be accepted and the same are rejected.
2. Since the granted land was sold within a period of 15 years, by the impugned order the land has been restored to the original grantee. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order is also passed under Section 5(1)(b) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 restoring the land, which is not permissible
3. In view of the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Mohammed Jaffer and Another v State of Karnataka, the provisions of PTCL Act are not applicable. Hence, the impugned order of restoration is passed exercising the power under Section 61(3) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act Against the impugned order, the petitioner has got right of appeal under Section 113 of the Act
4. The contention urged that 15 years of non-alienation shall be reckoned from the date of vesting of the land in the Government, is not tenable. Section 61(1) of the Act stipulates 15 years from the date of final order passed by the Tribunal under sub-section (4), (5) or (5-A) of Section 48-A of the Act.
5. Writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
