HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KESHAV NARAYAN RAMAKRISHNA BHAT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
ORDER
1. The petitioner claims to be the owner of land bearing Sy.No.51 of Amsalli village, Honnavar Taluk, and in the said land, arecanut garden is developed, and the name of the petitioner is mutated in the record of rights as owner. The petitioner further states that Sy. No.28 Betta 1 of Amsali village, Honnavar taluk, measuring 6 acres 13 guntas is a government betta land and was assigned for better cultivation of Sy. No.51 to the petitioner. As per Rule 131-F of Karnataka Forest Manual. Such being the case, an extent of 20 gutnas in Sy. No.28 has been assigned for public burial ground. Petitioner’s contention is that the assignment of 20 guntas of land for public burial ground is contrary to Rule 131-F of the Karnataka Forest Manual and Section 71 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.
2. Learned HCGP submits that the respondent No.2 in exercise of power under Section 71 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act has rightly designated an extent of 20 guntas of land in Sy. No.28, as public burial ground, and therefore, the order passed by the respondent No.2 is in conformity with the provisions of law, and the same does not warrant any interference.
3. Considered the submissions made by the l
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.