Back
2025 Supreme(Kar) 962
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
Jambunath S/o Bhootappa Majjagi - Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner, Haveri - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 105518 of 2018
Decided On : 18-09-2025
For the Appellants : Sunil S. Desai, Sheba A. Khanapur
For the Respondent: Ashok T. Kattimani
Public officials acting in conformity with statutory powers are not guilty of misconduct absent clear evidence of wrongdoing, and any report against them must adhere to principles of natural justice.
Headnote:(A) Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 - Sections 128 to 131 - Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Allegations of misconduct by public officials in land mutation and patta issuance - The court held that actions taken by the petitioners were in compliance with statutory provisions and did not constitute misconduct. Principles of natural justice were violated as no enquiry was conducted before the report was submitted. (Paras 7, 10)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, a Tahasildar and Shrestedar, were accused of misconduct related to land allotment. Land Tribunal had rejected applications for occupancy rights by alleged tenants, allowing landlords to restore the khata to their names, which the petitioners executed according to the law.
Findings of Court:
The actions of the petitioners were lawful and did not amount to any professional misconduct, nor could negligence alone lead to misconduct charges. The impugned report was quashed for failing to adhere to natural justice principles.
Issues: Whether the actions taken by the petitioners constituted professional misconduct and the legality of the enquiry report without due process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the petitioners acted within their authority under the relevant sections of law and that the report lacked fairness, as no notice was provided to the petitioners to defend against the allegations.
Result: Petition allowed; impugned report quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks to quash the inquiry report. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background of occupancy rights and land allocations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. legal basis for mutating khata and alleged misconduct. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. due process and principles of natural justice violated. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. quashing of the impugned report and proceedings. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
1. In this petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs:
“(a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the bearing impugned enquiry report dtd: 13-08-2018 bearing No.SIBBANDI/VAHI-61/2018-19 submitted by Respondent No.2 vide ANNEXURE-E, in the interest of justice and equity.
(b) Consequently, Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 to consider the application dtd: 25-08-2018 filed by the Petitioners by rejecting the impugned report and directing the Assistant Commissioner to re- enquire into the matter after hearing the Petitioners in the matter, in the interest of justice and equity.
(c) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, including an order as to costs, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that certain persons claiming to be tenants in respect of lands bearing Sy.Nos.34/1 and 34/2 of Kulenur village, filed applications in Form No.7 seeking grant of occupancy rights in their favour. The said applications filed by the tenants having been opposed by the landlords, the Land Tribunal proceeded to reject the applications filed by the alleged tenants vide order dated 01.10.1980, as a result of which the landlords became entitled to get the Khata restored/mutated into their respective names. Accordingly, they approached petitioner Nos.1 and 2, who were working as jurisdictional Tahasildar and Shrestedar, who considered the said requests and mutated the Khata and changed/restored the revenue records in favour of the original landlords.
4. Subsequently, on 09.12.1999, land bearing Sy.Nos.81/1A/1, 85/1A/1 and 143, were declared as excess lands under Section 63 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, by the Assistant Commissioner/Land Tribunal. Under the said order, after having declared the aforesaid lands as excess lands in the hands of the landlords, the Assistant Commissioner/Land Tribunal allotted portions of the said lands in favour of 39 persons/beneficiaries. The said beneficiaries/allottees approached the petitioners seeking grant of patta in their favour in respect of the said allotted lands. The said request was accepted by the petitioners, who accordingly issued patta in favour of the beneficiaries/allotees in the year 2017.
5. Subsequent to the aforesaid events, the respondent No.2/Assistant Commissioner submitted the impugned report vide Annexure-E dated 13.08.2018, to the respondent No.1/Deputy Commissioner inter alia alleging that the aforesaid acts on the part of the petitioners i.e., Tahasildar and Shirestedar in restoring/mutating the Khata in favour of the original landlords were instances of misconduct and that the petitioners were guilty of allotting government lands in favour of various private persons. Aggrieved by the impugned report at Annexure-E dated 13.08.2018, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petition.
6. A perusal of the material on record, will indicate that two allegations have been made against the petitioners, who were the jurisdictional Tahasildar and Shirestedar in the year 2017-18; firstly, that they had mutated/restored the khata in respect of land bearing Sy.Nos.34/1 and 34/2 in favour of the original landlords/land owners in the year 2017; secondly though 39 persons had been allotted lands as beneficiaries by the Assistant Commissioner/Land Tribunal, vide order dated 09.12.1999, the petitioners had issued patta in favour of differ
