I WP 3()79()/ 10
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 29?" DAY OF OCTOBER 2010
BEFORE
'THE: HONBLE MRJUSTICE A.S.PAcHHAPL:R~Ev A '
WRIT PETITION NO.30790/20:10 »I-KLRf4E.2VE5]"O.~VI,'4
BETWEEN
SR1. BEERESHWARA SWAMY TRUST___(RR;G;;,»
RAMA MANDIRA ROAD, " '
TI-IONACHI KOPPAL.
MYSORE--57O 009,
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. _ ' "1?EjI'ITIONE3R/S
(BY SR1. T.N. RAOi:31UO£;iu4\;1frIy"~23; ADVS.}
AND
1. THE STzaTEROF"1%;AR:\:AT2'aKA,
REVENUE DEPARTIWLENT.
M,S.BLIILD1NG_,_ VIDHANA SOUDHA,
~ A}V}:BE'.D£{AR
" .£3A1\IGALORE~560 001.
2.2' :51-;IVI«: O'E.RvL"iY.O~OMM1SS1ONER,
'-- THE URBAN DISTRICT.
MfiYSC)R;.'43_--.E_i.'/O 009.
1. THE AS~S1STANT COMMISSIONER,
.3 A THE OFFICE: OF' THE)
« _ . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
min; MYSORE2 URBAN DISTRICT,
: MYSORE~57O 009.
2 WP 30790/ IO
4. THE TAHSILDAR.
HUNSUR MAIN ROAD.
THE MYSORE URBAN DISTRICT.
MYSORE-570 009. RESPONDENT"/'--ST
(BY SR1. R. OM KUMAR. AGA}
=l<****
THES WRIT PETITION IS FILEDv'»UN{)13J?I ARIiOLES'[j'2_2e;:;_e'
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDI_A'PRAY1NG'FO {SSUE '
A WRIT OF PROHIBITION AGAINSTTTHE RES_PONDE.N
FOR RESTRINGING THEM FROi\/["1.N"CIp'I'ING IACTEOVN 'AGAINST
THE ¥'ETITIONER AND PETETIONI-ER'*« OFFICE ANY
OTHER APPROPRIATE VVRIT; ORDER'OR'DTRECT1ON V
THIS WRIT PETITION O'O.IyI1i\1OfT ON. "FOR CPRELIMINARY
HEARING. THIS DAY,"i'{r_IE cOUR'If':1»rLA1;)I?I_TI-n3.I«fOLLO\nr1NO:
The *p€{i'tiO.I:iLjpiS seek;-'Tng'é1" Of prohibition against
the respoiideiats' direction, apprehending
dispossessiorittiof -_petitiQ'i?ier from the property bearing
"S,_§\I0.1V_fz;i§3./ 1T2.A'i–,!.2'_§;xeept an area of 8 guntas taken Over
reievant for the purpose of this petition are
" -I I jv ' ~ aps-».under:" , 3
_ a petitioner Trust is Said to be in existence since time
'—-.iIr1rn§:mOria1 and that here is a Temple constructed by the Trust
ifivherein the peopie belonging to Kuruba community attend and
X…
\-W.
3 VIP 30790/10
offer prayers and that these being the facts, some of the
persons who were in occupation of the house propertiesas
tenants, were issued notice by the Tahsildar dlY€CtiF1g”t1iCil_’l A’
vacate the premises and in the circumstances,.sthe=.pe–t.itioner'”
apprehended that the action will be;jtalb{:en;
authorities to dispossess thern frorn the land’: “bd’earingV
R.S.N0.127/2 and 129/1 and inllttiese “have
filed this petition seeking it it
3. Today, the has also
produced an orderédatied hy the Tahsildar
in LND PR 951/ ‘Tahsildar has issued a
direction to vaca.te”–‘t..he_pprolperty, failing which action would be
taken by inifiating under Section l92–A of the
Karnatalia LandVR’eV_enue Act.
l t11e_ circurnstances, I have heard the learned
counsel hpetitioner and also the learned AGA for the
respon–d__ents.~ A
_ could be seen from the provisions of Section 67 (2)
the–.Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, where any property
h o.r_Hany right in or over any property is claimed by or on behalf
E
f
‘fie
4 WP 30790/10
of the State Government or by any person as against the State
Government, it shall be lawful for the Deputy Commissionttrfor
a Survey Officer not lower in rank than if
Commissioner, after formal enquiry to pass an_or.derVvd’ecidir1g”
the claim. So, in case, if any land belongingi to
provided under Section 67 (1) in possession
person other than the State Goyernrnent, Sit: jhvtheivtilaeputy
Commissioner who has the under
Section 67 (2) of the Karnatalia and he can
pass appropriate concerned and
for the said has to be done. So as
could be hat_ld’,” Tahsildar has issued
the order dated 14-09-2010 stating that
the petitioneri”did’ not on 09-09-2010 and in the
“c’ir.cumst’arr_._t?,es has directed to vacate the premises Within three
Ii1’1onth’s” update of communication of this order. As there
is no enquiry ‘thy.-i’the Deputy Commissioner, no such orders
have been by him. The initiation of the proceedings by
i’i”‘ahsi1diar on his own is erroneous and illegal. In the
_ =eirct;’mstanees, the petition is allowed and the order passed by
“”theiiiTahsildar in ms PR 91/10-1; dated 14-09-2010 is
fa
£.
t.-J..__e
tr’
5 VVP 30790/10
quashed with a direction that the Deputy Commissioner may
initiate proceedings under Section 67 (2) of the Karnataka
Revenue Act, hoid a formal enquiry and pass
orders in accordance with law by affording to
the petitioner. The petition is aecordingiy 4′ it
JL