A-Kharab land is attached to cultivable land belonging to the holder, while B-Kharab land is specifically reserved for public purposes. Authorities cannot arbitrarily re-classify land from A-Kharab to B-Kharab for public use without evidence of public utility or compliance with the Land Revenue Rules.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

1. The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 20.12.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.18295/2022.

2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

FACTS:

3. The dispute relates to the land bearing Survey No.20 of Chinnappanahali Village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. As per the petitioner, the said land had fallen to the share of the grandfather of the petitioner viz., Sri H. Hanuma Reddy s/o Sri Chikkamuniswamy Reddy in the family partition that was effected between the children of late Sri Chikkamuniswamy Reddy. The partition was recorded in writing and registered in Partition Deed dated 30.09.1955.

4. The grandfather of the petitioner and others had made an application for conferring occupancy rights as the said land was classified as inam land. The Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition, Bengaluru, vide order dated 19.12.1966 in Case No.1 & 18/1959-60, had directed for registering the applicants as occupants in respect of the land measuring 4 acres 39 guntas and kharab land measuring 10 acres 20 guntas in Survey No.20 of Chinnappanahali Village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, under Section 10 of the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Inams Abolition Act').

5. The revenue records got mutated in the name of the petitioner's grandfather in view of the order dated 19.12.1966 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition, Bengaluru District. The Special Deputy Commissioner initiated proceedings under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Land Revenue Act') to examine the revenue records that stood in the name of the father of the petitioner viz., Sri H. Thippa Reddy in respect of the land in Survey No.20 of Chinnappanahali Village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. The Special Deputy Commissioner, vide order dated 28.01.2008 passed in RRT(2) CR No.29/2006-2007, held that the entries made in favour of the father of the petitioner and others in the revenue records in respect of the land in Survey No.20 were not based on the Government grant orders. It was further held that the grant made in favour of the petitioner's grandfather was not proper. Consequently, the Special Deputy Commissioner directed the Tahsildar, Bengaluru East Taluk, to resume the land to the Government.

6. The order dated 28.01.2008 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner in RRT(2) CR No.29/2006-2007 came to be challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.3069/2008. The learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition vide judgment and order dated 20.08.2010.

7. The petitioner filed W.A.Nos.3266-3268/2010 against the order dated 20.08.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.3069/2008. The Division Bench, after considering the case, had allowed the writ appeals and set aside the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner dated 28.01.2008 as well as the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 20.08.2010, vide its judgment and order dated 27.01.2016 and remanded the matter back to the Special Deputy Commissioner for f