- 1 -
NC: 2023:KHC:37170
WP No. 21768 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 21768 OF 2023 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. MANJAMMA
W/O LATE KEMPANNA
AGED 54 YEARS
R/O HOOVINAYAKANAHALLI
JALA HOBLI
YELAHANKA TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 064
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M B CHANDRACHOODA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001
2.
THE TAHASILDAR
YELAHANKA TALUK
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA
YELAHANKA
BENGALURU - 560 064
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C.N. MAHADESHWARAN, AGA)
Digitally signed
by VIDYA G R
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2023:KHC:37170
WP No. 21768 of 2023
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
DATED
18/07/2023
IN
CASE
NO.
LND/NCR/CR/54/2022-23
PASSED
BY
THE
TAHASILDAR,
YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEXURE-E, BY
ISSUE OF WRIT OR CERTIORARI, IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER'S
CONCERNED AND ETC.
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the
order dated 18.07.2023 at Annexure-'E' insofar as the
petitioner is concerned.
2. In terms of Annexure-'E', the Tahsildar has
recorded a finding that the petitioner has encroached upon
the Government land in Sy.No.42 of Hoovinayakanahalli,
Jala Hobli, Yelahanka Taluk, as is made out from the Taluk
Surveyor and accordingly further directions be passed for
restoration of land to the Government.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner would contend
that the order of the Tahsildar is without jurisdiction as
Tahsildar has no jurisdiction to have initiated proceedings
under Section 104.
- 3 -
4. Learned AGA submits that in terms of order
passed in W.P.No.18157/2023 c/w W.P.No.2664/2023
disposed off on 05.10.2023, the present writ petition could
be disposed off on the same terms.
5. Heard both sides.
6. Noticed that in the notice at Annexure-C1, there
is an allegation regarding encroachment of road as well as
'Kaluve'.
7. Perused the order in W.P.No.18157/2023 c/w
W.P.No.2664/2023. Para 3 to 6 reads as follows:
3.
Learned
Additional
Government
Advocate fairly submits that the Tahsildar has
no jurisdiction to issue notices under Section
104 of the Act in the present case, as the
present
dispute
relates
to
alleged
encroachment of ‘Kaluve’. It is submitted that
insofar
as
encroachment
of
‘Kaluve’
is
concerned, the appropriate enquiry is to be
made under Section 67(2) of the Act.
- 4 -
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners in
both the matters would further draw attention
to
the
survey
sketch
at
Annexure-K
in
W.P.No.2664/2023 and submit that the notice
of the Tahsildar is based on the sketch
prepared which demarcates the encroachment.
But, however such sketch has been prepared in
the absence of the petitioners and accordingly,
even if the proceedings are initiated by the
respondent authorities afresh, if they base it on
the
sketch
at
Annexure-'K'
in
W.P.No.2664/2023, it would result in injustice
caused to them. Accordingly, it is prayed that
the survey be prepared afresh in the presence
of the petitioners in both the Writ Petitions and
on the basis of the sketch prepared in such
survey after notice to the petitioners in both the
matters, the proceedings as per law may be
permitted to be proceeded.
5.
After hearing both sides in both the
matters, in light of the stand of the AGA, the
notices at Annexure-'A' are set aside.
6.
However insofar as further action to
be taken, it is ordered as follows:
- 5 -
(a)
Survey be conducted in presence of the
petitioners in both the matters, wherein the
sketch
to
be
prepared
demarcating
the
encroachment if any.
(b)
Subsequently, once the survey process is
completed, it is upon the Deputy Commissioner
to take proceedings in terms of Section 67(2) of
the Act and follow the procedure therein.
Needless to state, upon conclusion of the said
enquiry, the petitioners are at liberty to seek
redressal, if they agree in terms of Section
67(3) of the Act.
(c)
The identification of the ‘Kaluve’ is to be
done on the basis of the records maintained by
the Assistant Director of Land Records. Copy of
the
documents
to
be
shared
with
the
petitioners.
(d)
The BBMP also to be notified at the time of
survey.
In light of the same, noticing that the assertion of
the State is regarding encroachment of road as well as
'Kaluve',
an
identical
order
as
made
in
- 6 -
W.P.No.18157/2023 c/w W.P.No.2664/2023 could be
passed.
8. It is the contention of learned counsel for
petitioner that the proceedings impugned in the present
writ petition are based on survey report and sketch which
has been prepared behind the back of the petitioner. The
said submission is taken note