Smt Pranavi M K vs State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2008

-1-

IN TEE HIGH COURT GE' KAREATAKA AT 

xaxrma 21-115 mm mm may or Newman, 

PRESERT

was Kowsm 2~m.JUsTIc_E....v,_e.   

WRIT PETITIOK No. 129321/2ta'ee.-3 {xLRe~R;'Es}" 

BETWEEN :

SM'? PRANAVI  _   
W'/¢ Lam mIsmA9mL.aomn3'%Tv__  

AQED zxsotrz 55 s;gAé2._$,T__ 1'

312:      
3?':-5* _. "$553 '17'.i"-.."1*5*"31.7?"fi*.'.5'1'?';,-3* 5599955 »

  3.3  Q  

 $M'i*  V in   " '

mg  Gem
gem _AB,G'£3'i"._ 3:, mgans ,

uszvrr $Ai§.1'l*¥§3l MK

' i3*.io'~z;,2ar1*E m;*'§m~zA9PA G-came;

 29 YEARS,

.A _p§.é.s:§AN-xxx M K

n{;3*:.zA:i*E mzsmtzwm Gcaerm
.§_;C-§E.';'3=';1lsB0£I'J3 26 mam,

$3.; R/A3.' mmmsz I-EGIBE,

GUEEI£[$AR VI§I.;I;AGE AND POST,

 summ mmx

(By sri

A D.K.{3)

P.?.'1'Z{TI&FjE 1.  "

2 THE TAHSILBAR
SULLIA. I).§{. (D)

3 $33 AEBITIORAL LAND Rzsvnaaxsamiéx §
commxwrzs, s." A."'-"-- =_ "» v
snznza B.K.'z§;

4 I32 ngpurz caufi$sifififia>% "7j 
MA2€GALQRE__B.I_{. (13.3; _  -   RESPONDENTS

{By Srit.i;ufifi3Rv§_GQYERfififlNT.§§EADER}

THIS wax: pmriwiafl xsqitzp uaman ARTICLES
226 AND 327 at £3 co$$wIrv§IoH_ofi IRBIA ?RAXING
mo amass wax enema §§; 1?L7;2G93, PASSED BY THE
KARNAEAKA ApfigLLAxEa*.'wgI3ugAL xx APPEAL
xo.4s3f2oo3, cgRmIFIan=jcc§x%'o? was 03933 IS
PRODGCEB Am AHEEKQRE A.  A v.;

__QUASK gag oRnz§=nr, 15.4.2003 yassnn 52 was
nE9mr2»coEMmssxoHna, D.K. cmawxrrza coyr or was
gamma IS E3ODfl€5B,3£_ANNEURE 3.

gguzsx 19HE[ o§b§a_'bwC 11.3.2003 935529 B? rum
iaEsuLARIzAmIsH_. CGMITTEE coyy or wxrcx rs

?&oa3£a3 AT--AfifiEK¥RE c.

 r Petition «coming up for prelizmnary

 «onf this éay, the Ceurt zzsacie the

"~,f¢i;¢&ing:



Ju nt

This writ petition is fiied see_}:.i?x:g ~.V_for

quashing czf the orders passed by 

Appellate fribunal, Bangalore ,  ~  ,    

Nc.483f26G8 dated 11.7.2003 wg§reig*th¢"mx$$un%1

has dismissed the appeal A<::::Ii.€i,rzn:i.Trz€_;f iikie °'j<:: td e'r 

passed by the Beput§v."VConn1:.'Vs.:3:io:Q.4.'r  I)$.I»:sh:§.zza.
Kannada, Mangaldrg, ..£ontentio:2 of the yetitianers

aha: :'K;isfi§ap§a« Gawda, husband. of the 1*"

' yati:iona£=gna father of petitioners 2 to 5 has

 2 }i$.e:se=;nVv'Vc;i'3gti3?é;ti2:g the Government lands bearing 33;.

 and 1,58/'1C ta an extent of 5 acres

"'n$;tuat§é at euttigar village, Taluka sullia, 9.x.

 had also maée vaust agricultural irrprovmnents

..}:i,n land sy.no.26'?/S which is a. kazxa 3.3.116. situated

in Guttigar viliage, Sullia talulc, B.K. 9151:. He

\Sk/'-



4.

Kaxnatalca Appellate Tribzzzzal and the  of

the Tribunal by order datad 17-~'3'~.'2.'G_£_3;'8'"" 

the appeal at the stage of a&aiss.io_fi*~.§y§.[.:'ho1s;}in.§ 
that the appellants caizneét  AV

tixsputed land and cannqt: ci'ai'1i:..regu;1Ia.:§i$é.ti.€>i1 65

unauthorised occupa.tion""é.§"~.c£  usefufi
purpose would be  'Va:£kg:ittifig'  appeal
and accordingly  at the stage
of adzniss:'Llor:; .'     the said. order
of the :_  are before th.:i.$
Co1:xf!;_ _;i.v:v:  

I :'--._hat_.re  »  * -'learned couxzsal

appeaxing for"  '  and the learned

Government  ~ Ladvcaxzaté'   'ap:pea.2:'.i.ng

rash fidanés .. E 

far the

    _¢$§;unse1 appearing for the

1.p€:?Litic>x1é;::_s A  that the arder passed by

_i§_1j:e,_.44¢ca;;xm1ttea ' for Regularisation of Unauthorised

  censidarixzg the appiication for

"   "re-guiari:sation of unauthorised cultivatien of

. ' £'+c;;ve£1*nnue V.'v"'n,t land is in a czyclostyled form and is

\9\9n



order passed by the Cozxnuittee as per Annemire 'B'

ta: the writ petition would clearly sh91f   "'£'.}1e

apyliczation fiied in font; no.  

rejected on the basis  -Vof»- th.5§ 

enumerated in the order, .i'.'-,e§. iihe ':aj5p3,i;:a:§i:._ ":éas

mat made any nzprovégaézgt 3'3:-.V tlzew   

ccnfimning cf thes c>r::!serV__j§§:*:::.J'.w that 6
grounds have beexi order and the
Cozmzittee has passed _it.hé V*£tating that in
View of ]:_$V:}4«ér§*:1*:.'..1.'_e:.;j;v;;:--.&3,ti « the said grozzzzds

for ;:e3;$g:t.i§£sg:V'Vc$&s »L{i1é§vvLA.a gpp11¢Va£1on, the application

is ..:B?aT '3:aTaso:3:s whatsoever are assigned
for aéxgning its "":.Vhca:."'c1t  izwravnt in the land and no

  2;; a1s':$' held as required by law. The

  Chaaxéissioner has failed to cazmidsar the

 (Sf the said. carrier in accordance with

law: _  1~Re has praceeded on the basis that as per

  records available, the appxicant haci not made

 ;arzy i@rovmne.~nt and am Committee has rightly

rejected the appliaation.

\>-/>-



Kaxnataka Land Revenue Rules is sat5.s,e.;;_jea§;~... the

regularisation af unauthorised cu1%i§fi£ifih& ¢f

Government land can be regu1ari$¢d J§yAvfiha =

Committee and wherefore, fihe ¢qm§i££ee is Eamnd'

ta consider as to whethgr tfie appli¢a§£Aha#.fia$§.

cut 3 gmaund for raguia%isatiduléf u$gfi£§orisefi
cultivation and a%§re£5£é;di£z;s Qiéaf that the
order passed by £fié flép§fiyIé$m¢fis§ioner and the
Karnatalca   the order
Passeé ,b§",E§§f.d§W@ittéei[£9%mVcsnsideration of
appl;¢a#iq#"i§9;' £%§fi1é%@§$tion of unauthorised
cu1E;vati§fi*,«§f *é§verfiment land is clearly
errofiéafisagd £fie:§$fié is liable to he set aside

anti' -the fimgteé .-2.75 §.;aab1e to be mzaitted to the

 "-&C&fiittéa¢ fo£HH£egularisati¢n """ of Unautharised

"¢uit§$§tfi5m gc£ Govarnmant land to paas fresh

cxéers ii éccordance with law.

Vhéaordingly, I proaeed to pass the

«K faliawing:

U1/9.

 



-19..

ORDER

The writ petition is aJ.lowed…u”–« “o§£’a;!c§i:,

passed by the Kaxnata}ca__,.,.Appe__ .1.’ié;tt=z:’_’;.

Bangalore, in Appeal No.§§.:83/_jG$.:’ i’?:;*?’.V’2.G:08

confirming the order .55 the ‘:3e’i’;.:1:§:yoV’vVCio:gm;i,.$Vs.;i.ozie;:

n.x., Mangalore dat§aaQ’;§.d4;fi§¢§ Vgin case
Ro.D.9is-RAP.11/9é§fl? o;§oc§fi§n._¢¢§£i£ming the
order passed by ogfcnstituted for
consideratioo filed for
Regtzlari Cultivation of
GOV@EIflflE%:£%§jj”..l;i§§g§ and the mtter is
remzihtecj; fgspondent – the Adfiitionai
Land fiégglazigéfigcc committee, Sullia, o.x., for

coxisifiaration of the application of

in accordance with law.

‘g§a£/191193

Sd/-ea’
Judge