The SC & ST Commission does not possess the jurisdiction to adjudicate or interfere in civil disputes regarding land ownership and possession, nor can it grant protection in such matters, as it exceeds the powers conferred by the SC & ST Commission Act, 2002.

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T BOTH ARE R/O MACHANAHALLI, Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(NOTE: THE OTHER PARTIES IN NOTICE I.E., A.C. & THASILDAR NOT NECESSARY PARTIES, NOT RELIEF SOUGHT AGAINST THEM)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE NO.KARA/AJA/AABU/COMMISSION/LAND CASE NO.71/2018 VIDE ANNX-C AND C1 DTD 11.10.2022, ISSUED BY THE R-2.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL ORDER

1. The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: Wherefore, it is respectfully prays to this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue the writ of certiorari or any other writ by quashing the notices no.KARA/AJA/AABU/Commission/Land Case No.71/2018 vide Annexure-C and C1 dated 11.10.2022, issued by the respondent No.2 in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The facts of the case are that the Respondent No.1 has approached the Respondent No.2 stating that the Respondent No.1 is in possession of the property and there is an interference by the petitioner. The Respondent No.1 has sought the protection against the petitioners in respect of the land. Pursuant thereto, the second respondent /commission issued a notice on 11.10.2022 by directing the petitioners to be present on 02.12.2022 at 11.00 a.m. Aggrieved thereby the petitioners are before this court.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner's submits that Petitioners are the lawful owners of the land bearing Survey No.20/2 to an extent of 2 acres 37 guntas of land at Machanahalli Village, Urdigeri Hobli, Tumkur taluk and they are in lawful possession and enjoyment of the property according to their share as specified in the RTC. It is submitted that the Respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to issue notice where the Respondent No.1 has sought for protection. It is submitted that the Respondent No.2 has acted beyond the jurisdiction, conferred on them as per the SC & ST Commission Act, 2002 as such the same needs to be set aside.

4. Learned counsel appearing to the Respondent No.1 submits that commission in the process of protecting the rights of Respondent No.1, had issued a notice. It is submitted that the petitioner ought to have appeared before the Respondent No.2 and ought to have submitted before the Respondent No.2, but he cannot come before this court by filing the instant writ petition and the petition has to be dismissed on the ground.

5. Though vakalath is filed, there is no representation on behalf of the Respondent No.2/Commission.

6. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel of the Respondent No.1, perused the entire material on record. Impugned in the present petition is a notice issued by the Respondent No.2-/Commission. The relief that is sought by the Respondent No.1 is pertaining to a civil dispute between the Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent No.1, he sought for a protection and the Commission has issued a notice. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Commission has no such powers to interfere in these kind of disputes and grant protection to the Respondent No.1 on the face of it this notice that is issued by Respondent no.2 is beyond the powers/jurisdiction conferred on the SC-ST Commission. In that view of the matter , this Court is passing the following:

ORDER

i. Accordingly, the writ petition is Allowed by setting aside the notice dated 11.10.2022 issued by Respondent No.2/Commission.

ii. The parties are at liberty to agitate their claims before the appropriate forum.

iii. Pending I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed.