IMPORTANT POINT
A grantee cannot file a second application for land resumption after a prior rejection, as it violates principles of estoppel and res judicata.

ORDER :

Suraj Govindaraj, J.

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs :

Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere, in No.PTCL/CR-04/2008-09 dated 15.7.2013 (Annexure D).

Pass any other order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including an order as to costs in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The original petitioner is the son of one Chandrappa. After the petitioner's expiry, his legal representatives are brought on record.

3. The contention of the original petitioner was that 6 acres of dry land in Sy.No.26 of Mangenahalli, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District was granted in favour of his father Chandrappa vide order bearing No.261/60-61/Darkast/ 30/60-61 and the Saguvali Chit was issued on 26.11.1963, with a condition that the land cannot be alienated for a period of 15 years. However, Chandrappa sold 3 acres of land in favour of Duggamma, i.e., respondent No.5 herein and another 3 acres of land in favour of Lakkamma on 19.10.1964. Thus, alienating the entire property granted to them.

4. The grantee Chandrappa had filed an application for setting aside the sale and for resumption of land before the Assistant Commissioner, Davanagere, in PTCL/CNC/3/99-2000, which was allowed by the said Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 27.12.2000, setting aside the sales executed by Chandrappa and ordering the resumption of land.

5. Meanwhile, Lakkamma had sold her 3 acres of land in favour of one Marthandappa, respondent No.4 herein. The said order of the Assistant Commissioner was challenged by Marthandappa and Duggamma before the Deputy Commissioner in PTCL/CR/12/2000-01, which came to be dismissed, confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Pursuant to that, the revenue records were changed in the name of Chandrappa.

6. The said Marthandappa and Duggamma had filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.27045-46/2001 challenging the order of the Deputy Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner, which came to be allowed by this Court vide order dated 29.08.2003. Quashing the said orders, this Court remitted the matter to the Assistant Commissioner with a direction to dispose of it in accordance with the law within six months.

7. In pursuance thereof, the Assistant Commissioner in PTCL/CR/5/2006-07 vide order dated 02.04.2008 once again held that there is a violation of the condition of the grant. As such, the sale of the land, which occurred within the stipulated period, was improper and ordered for resumption of the same. This order came to be challenged by Marthandappa and Duggamma before the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner, vide order dated 15.07.2013 set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner on several grounds. One of the main grounds is that the purchaser has been in possession of the land for more than 49 years, so their possession cannot be disturbed. It is challenging the same; the petitioner is before this Court.

8. Shri G C Shanmukha, Learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that there is a violation of the stipulation barring the sale of land for a period of 15 years. The saguvali chit was issued in the year 1963, and the sale was executed on 19.10.1964. The Assistant Commissioner had rightly allowed the application filed by Chandrappa, the father of the petitioner, and the same ought not to have been disturbed by the Deputy Commissioner.

9. Sri.S.V.Prakash, Learned counsel for respondent No.4/Marthandappa and the legal representatives of Duggamma / respondent No.5(a) to (c) and (e) to (g) submits that

9.1. Even prior to the proceedings filed before this Court once earlier, the said Chandrappa had filed a proceeding before the Assistant Commissioner, Shivamogga, in proceedings bearing No.159/499/79-80, which came to be disposed of by the Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 16.10.192 produced at Annexure- R2 to the statement of objections filed by respondent Nos.4 and 5.

9.2. The Assist