IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 29070 OF 2017 (KVOA)

BETWEEN:

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER RAMANAGAR DISTRICT RAMANAGAR- 562 159.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RAMANAGAR SUB DIVISION RAMANAGAR DISTRICT- 562 159.

3. THE TAHSILDAR MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGAR DISTRICT- 562 120.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJ KUMAR M., AGA)

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M AND:

Location: HIGH COURT OF SRI. M REVANNA SIDDAIAH KARNATAKA S/O LATE VEERA MALIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/A KALARI VILLAGE AND POST, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT- 562 120 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. AMOGHA R SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAJESWARA P N, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE RAMANAGAR IN M.A.NO.14/2008 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The State has preferred this writ petition assailing the order dated 27.01.2014 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagar (for short 'the Appellate Court') in MA.No.14/2008, whereby the Appellate Court set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Ramanagar District dated 24.09.2008 and restored the allowance earlier sanctioned in favour of the respondent by order dated 11.07.2003. 2. Brief facts of this case are as under:

The respondent's father, late Veera Maliyappa, was the original Patel Baravardar, officiating the Patel of Kalari and Kodipalya Villages in Kasaba Hobli, Magadi Taluk. After abolition of the Village Offices under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (for short 'KVOA Act'), the respondent applied for payment of monthly remuneration in terms of the Government Order dated 19.11.1997, which extended ex-gratia allowance to the former, Village Offices and their legal heirs. Acting upon the Tahsildar's recommendation, the Deputy Commissioner sanctioned Rs.500 per month to the respondent by order dated 11.07.2003. Subsequently, upon certain complaints that the respondent was not working as a Patel but worked as a Branch Post Master from 1982 to 1996, the newly constituted Deputy Commissioner, Ramanagar by order dated 24.09.2008, cancelled the earlier sanctioned allowance and directed him to recover the amount already paid. The respondent challenged the said order before the Appellate Court in MA.No.14/2008, which was allowed, holding that the Deputy Commissioner had no jurisdiction to review his earlier order.

3. Heard learned Addl. Government Advocate for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate for the petitioners submits that the order of the Appellate Court is illegal and perverse, as the respondent was never appointed as a Patel by the Government nor did he discharge such duties, and that the postal records establish that he worked as a Post Master, and that implementation of the impugned order would impose unwarranted financial burden on the State.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondent's father Veera Maliyappa was recorded as a Patel Baravardar and he was officiating as a Patel, during his father's illness receiving potige in the years 1962-63, 1993-64. Learned counsel submits that the Tahsildar's report confirmed this fact and recommended him for allowance, which the Deputy Commissioner rightly confirmed on 11.07.2003. Further, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner has remained in force, until its unauthorised cancellation in the year 2008. Learned counsel contends that Section 9(3) of the KVOA Act, provides an appellate remedy to the Divisional Commissioner (now the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal), who could entertain an appeal against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, and there is no provision