High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri S S Vasudeva Rao vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 27 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri S S Vasudeva Rao vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 27 June, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar


IN THE HIGH comm 0? KARNATAKA AT 3#;§§zs;¢L%c2{::E

rmreo THIS THE 27*” DAV as j2o;{s’ M’ ”

BEFORE ~

THE HON’BLE MR.3U5TIC E SHAN;f’gA§§W§€iU:DAR k A %

wan PETI_T_;1AiCJN_v.NOf.§83§§_§___(“iF .gOO6′{#<L$3:fi-REQ)

BETWEEN:


S.S,Vasudevfa Ra<_) H V . _ V __

Sic Sflnivaé?-8       

Aged abouiIES6_jre..at_sV    H

P2/0 Mensa,  Ps:§st  V

  _   

Cizicvkmagaizir. lT3ie’;i$,x:ict. ‘ ‘ ~.. _ — . . i3’e¥:itio11er

(By s:~i’\:;§hn;x:3:1″:ai;, A§g;,’;) Vw

VofKar;:1ataka

” ‘Ré’p_’i3;: “it.$ Stzcretaxy

._ ‘D(1’:lp£Vii”.f_.!1’x§i’i’i of Forest &. Ecroiogv
A V ‘fliiiidifig, Ba11ga1om~~(}I.’

” £»J

2. “F111;-.*f «;D§:puty Ccmmissioner
Chiéckmagalur District, Chickmagalur.

, The Range Forest Ofiicer
$ringetri Range, Sringeri, Chickmagalur District.

” 4. The Range. Farest Oficfir

Social Foresuy, Sringcri

Chiclmagalur Distxict.

5. The Tahsildar
Singeri Taluk, Sxingexi
Chickmagalur District.

(By Sri G. Cha11drasht:kax~aiah, x
This Writ petition is undéf 227′ {if
the C€)I£1Stit1l’fi()I2I of India, praying to ‘the’;;mspo11dents
to C(}I3.Sidt3!” the ap};ziicatio;1—darted’ gfu-1~99 ” submitrtd by the
petitioner seel-ting of unauthorisation
occupatitm of the – mcafsufingié’ 4} ‘*a¢rcs 39 guntas in
sy.no.4 16 of Masige ‘1/’€V!_1;311i’, Vida Anncxure–A.
This;X=¢fi’§fVL:%;;etif_’ioni ozjmg in fi <')'i:1=fg_1:Vf g:pre}J1nm' ' my hearing in
E§–Grou};-,*'*§'hj_s 5:133; the following-

%%%% R
If.¢a1″*1′.. ‘zgéfit Advocate takes notice on
heha1i’2’afi’es15a_1id¢nt:$-;:

I H_ear€L’*’ « ….. 14 «

grievance of the petitioner is that the

” X .’és.1§p1iCé.it§f§fiiV for regulari-zation of his aneged

tixzgfiifihofized occupation of the land measuring 4 acres

guntas of Sy.N0.416 of Masige Village, Sringeri

Taiuk, is not considered anti decided by the Committes

though the same is filed on 1.1.1999.

f\/5

% %;.TRegma¢;,ts Z

.3,

3. During the course cf argument,

Bhat, learned advacate appearing on H

getitiener submits that the iané;

it is soppina betta land and _thef€fofe ther;é«”.iS:vr1<) L'

far regtflarization Of his
Neifher the f0r§ S't. la.fid:;=t ..»VSoppina"A19V§éita kinds
can ganted fgc ' unauthorized

occizpation' Under

Sectiiiiifif Land Revenue Act, the
§3I'iVi1v'3;:g'uf'{'.S " "Sf§j3piI'i{1 betta lands may be

perps.:::ec1'm be egxfified by the neighbeming land

gxiinéifi' ~13 View of the matter, though the

be granted the 'said lands, the Deputy

Ct'smm.__;s:§i:éner will have to consider the request. of the

.pf:1;iti9r;£ér far passing tha order relating to €:1"}}{)yI1'}.E:11t 0f

A' ':_VtVh<':~}3I'iviieg<=:s attached to thfil' sappina betta kancis. in

' " "view :31' tha matter, the fa-llewing OI'd{f:I' is made':-

0/'

Applicatitm filed by the pefitifiner beftntf the

Cummittee for Regularizafian of

Occupation, cannot be considered, as tl1€:7._1u3ei;iti<511'5e1*_'is '

not entitled to get the ownersliijj' ' oivéfz' ' be§§f::i »

lands. However, it is open f0rV4'£;]t1t1*;'.;3t2ti1;i.(:1i:a~?§"v ta

applicatien befare the Dépfity under'

Section '?9(2) of '_ZL{j1I1d 'féefiénue Act,
praying far pem3.issi{g.";_V'T't<A)_ attached
to soppina {if éifivagifilication is filed by
the shall be considered by the
Deputy} accerdance with law, on

reéflgfi petitienar is in occupation of the

%% am iancis and if the lands are really the

H xlands.

Sd/–

Judge

*(:k} banv