High Court Karnataka High Court

Mahantesh S/O Shivappa Budder vs The Principal Secretary on 14 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Mahantesh S/O Shivappa Budder vs The Principal Secretary on 14 July, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
Wp3E336.08

1

EN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE M73 DAY O1"<'=.}ULY, 2009

BEFORE

THE HC)N'!3LE M12.JzJs'1'1cE:: MORAN SHANTAN'E;'GO{7!.}§jA:.§   "

wan' pgmwnow No' 31336/200.8 {QM-:S*1*2'}~'::$::»   
Between: V " ' V V' 'V

MAHANTESH 8/C) SHEVAPPA EBUEFD-EIR

Agezszo mags, occ AG12:cu1:rumsfr;~~

R/A SAGARAVALLI WLLAGE  ' _  A " 
HANAGALTQ, HAVERI DISTRICT.  _  PE'§'{'1'I'C),NE..R'

{By 311.: S G KADADKA'I"I'i é;D iz..}_ 7

'THE PRINCI f3AIg 'SA":;'3-~VCIiT}"{'4Ii<.3-'V1*'2'~'.:.R.*-'
DEPT £7)?' REVENUE; M"'$_Bf[}£LDING
D}? E E2 A~MBEfDKAR~VEFrDHI
K;  CAERCLE'-.BAN'GAL'fDRE ----1.

' ' ':2, "Q%':zf¢IsI0N, BELGAEJM.

._ "7'%1fHE"*:5A~HAs4:L:§AR
A _HANA.GAL_T'ALU'K,, HAVERI DESTRICT,

 I4: ':51+:..§«:33UB' REGISTRAR, HANGALTQ,

 x T HA3<E?.3&L., BAYER! DISTRECT.  RESPONDENTS

   '{*§y~vs3;~;'f.:%.K'Hatti, i~§CGP,}

This patition is flied Lifidéf' Articies 226 and 22'? {If {ha

 V' ifiijnzdstituiion f India prayirxg tar; quash the notice dt. 33/' 10/EGGS
 Anr:-Ei issued by 4* respondent anci 5120.,

This petition earning on far greliminary hearing, this day; the:
Court rnade the fuliowing;



Wp31336.G8

ORDER

Certain Hanumanna Tlzimrnana ffied V’

No.7 for grant of occupancy the-:

Sy.N0.81/3 measuring 1 acre

Samasagi village, Hangal _ Th~e_

granted occxlpancy 1. Hnthe said
Hamagmalma Tlfinxmangsy 1982. Grant

certificate ‘_NQ:’-1O€ ieS11ed”‘i:e~’favo:.11’ of the said

Elanxmeaefie.'”I51}iI:f1£%:§§i1;:3:eL*fiiiadeeie63}; 23/11/1983. The said
Hanu111a1:;1a thereafter, 30101 the very

prepegeitgj ‘V feiaprceir ‘-.:’>f.ft:he petitioner on ()5/09/2008

& t’:1{j{$i:;¥g1i”‘L%a fegi$iere’ei’éAsaIe deed wide Annexure “D” to the

wI*i1:’_ pe!:i:i”;i;:V$1;’.A’;’-.f’Thereafter netiees were issued tn the

_ petii;i.0I1er’ the s:_1bwreg’stra1*, E-Iangal, directing the

.V_.’petei,*:.im°1e:: to ebtam me: ebjeetien certificate under Section

ef the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled

VT ” “Tfi,be(P1’ohibitie:1 Of TI”8;E1Sf€3}f’ 8!’ Certain Lands}, 19?8 from

E’,/’3

W§3l336.08

the concemed authority. Being aggieved

this Writ patition is fiiad.

Q. The: only questic}1′:-:0 bé.g_;1£”:Cide;’:

petition is as to whether, .V’1§:;z*t)§§»r*isVi’c§1*:’~§V;:T”<Vi:rf isfiarnataka
Scheduled Caste and sfisfiéagnéa ijf Transfer
Of Certain Lane:is).,¢ lands whase
occupancy Tribunal undsr

Section :' VF3efor:ns Act, 1974.

3. E_’u31V Cam”: in the case reperted in

A gfiearly held that Sactiorgzs 4 and 5 of

i:§j_é–»é;c:.VA_a:?efit>f__ applicablfi ta the lands Whesfi csccupazacy

figflts’ i%;%ea1’4€?:Lj–§?:a §’Iv%1ted by the Land Tribunal under Secfiom

é~8A <;f Reform$ Act, }.9'?4. The msp::)I1d@n1:3~–

VA 3§%1iI:*::§rit.i;es have ignored the dictum iaid dawn by the full

' b§;::1<::h in 1:133 aforesaid judgmant whila issuiflg {ha zmtice.

Acccarciingly, tha nstices issuad by the Sub–Rag'st:rar and

Tahsiidar, Haggai Vida Annexures "E3" and "F" datad

Wp3i336.G8
2:

13/18/2008 and /09/2008 respectively stand ‘

The 4* respondent is dire<:t.ed to register

presented on 06/09/2008 in SR.N0.P. 4»2';'r"."'" '

Writ Petition is allowed acco:1'diI1g';32_

{E

kmv.