THE STATE OF KARNATAKA vs SRI VENKATESHAPPA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1498 OF 2023 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE REVENUE COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
CHAPPARAKALLU,
VISWANATHAPURA POST,
KUNDANA HOBLI,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
DODDABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION,
DODDABALLAPURA,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.
5. THE TAHSILDAR
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
DEVANAHALLI,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP)
Digitally
signed by
RAKSHA
Location:
high court
of
karnataka
- 2 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
AND:
SRI. VENKATESHAPPA
S/O LATE RAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
R/O GANGAVARA CHOWDAPPANAHALLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
…RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT - SERVED)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS A) ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL B) SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT
PETITION NO.55072/2018 (KLR-RES); DATED 09.03.2022 AND
CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR JUDGMENT ON 09.10.2026 AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, K.S.BHARATH
KUMAR, J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING :
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR
- 3 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR)
The appellant-State has preferred the instant appeal
calling in question the legality and correctness of the order
dated 09.03.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in
Writ Petition No.55072/2018.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their rankings before the Writ Court.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the Committee
for Regularisation of Unauthorised Cultivation of Lands,
had regularised 3 acres 7 guntas of land of the petitioner
in Survey No.146/P-35 of Gangavara Chowdappanahalli
Village, Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, on
18.08.2007. As the saguvali chit was not issued by
respondent No.5-Tahsildar, the petitioner preferred Writ
Petition No.715/2008, which came to be allowed by the
order dated 21.01.2008 and as a result, the saguvali chit
was issued in favour of the petitioner.
- 4 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
4. Since the katha in respect of the said land was not
mutated in the name of the petitioner, he preferred Writ
Petition No.22764/2009, which came to be allowed on
05.08.2009. In spite of the said orders, the concerned
authorities did not take any action to mutate the name of
the petitioner in the revenue records. As a result, the
petitioner preferred contempt petition in CCC.N0.748/2009
(Civil) and during the pendency of the contempt
proceedings, the katha in respect of the land in question
was issued in favour of the petitioner.
5. Further, since the phodi and durasthi in respect of
the subject land was not done, the petitioner preferred
Writ Petition No.25172/2012, which came to be allowed on
14.08.2012 and in spite of the same, the authorities failed
to take action. As a result, the petitioner filed contempt
petition by in CCC.No.1873/2013 (Civil), which came to be
dismissed by the order dated 28.10.2013, by recording
that the order has been complied with. Consequently, the
phodi and durasthi was done and new Survey No.279 was
assigned to the land in question.
- 5 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
6. Subsequently, the Tahsildar/Secretary, Land
Regularisation Committee, Devanahalli Taluk, Devanahalli,
initiated proceedings under Rule 108-D (6) of Karnataka
Land Revenue Rules, 1966. Since there was insufficient
gomala land in the concerned village and that the records
pertaining to the orders regarding regularization and the
grant made on 18.08.2007 and 06.09.2007 were not
available in the records maintained by the Committee,
all the grants made were set aside by respondent No.4-
Assistant Commissioner, Doddaballapura Sub-Division,
Doddaballapura, Bengaluru Rural District, vide order dated
11.11.2016.
7. Being aggrieved by the said order dated
11.11.2016, the petitioner filed Writ Petition
No.55072/2018 before the learned Single Judge. The
learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by the order
dated 09.03.2022 and set aside the order dated
11.11.2016, passed by respondent No.4-Assistant
Commissioner, Doddaballapura. Being aggrieved by the
- 6 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
said order dated 09.03.2022, passed by the learned Single
Judge, the State has preferred the instant appeal.
8. Subsequent to the order dated 09.03.2022,
passed by the learned Single Judge and during the
pendency of the writ appeal, petitioner-Venkateshappa
died on 03.07.2023. Thereafter, the appellant-State has
filed an application - IA.No.1/2026, seeking impleadment
of the legal heirs of the petitioner. The said application
was filed on 07.06.2026 i.e., after lapse of nearly three
years.
9. It is stated in the affidavit accompanying the
application that, recently when the Village Administrative
Officer was verifying the voters list during SIR duty, he
found that the petitioner - Venkateshappa died on
03.07.2023. It is further stated that, immediately
thereafter, in order to ascertain the legal heirs of late
Venkateshappa, the Village Administrative Officer visited
the house of late Venkateshappa and secured the
information from his wife Lakshamamma.
- 7 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
10. Though there is delay of nearly three years in
filing the said IA.No.1/2026, the appellant-State has not
filed any application seeking condonation of the said delay
and an application to set aside the abatement. The
reasons assigned by the appellant-State for not bringing
the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner on record is not
satisfactory and further, since the said application
IA.No.1/2026 has been filed without filing an application
seeking condonation of delay of three years for bringing
the legal representatives of deceased petitioner on record
and an application for setting aside of abatement, we are
of the considered opinion that the application -
IA.No.1/2026 filed by the appellant-State does not find
any merit for consideration and accordingly, the same is
rejected.
11. Further, there is delay of 577 days in preferring
the writ appeal. The appellant-State has filed an
application - IA.No.1/2023 under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, seeking condonation of delay of 577 days in
- 8 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
preferring the appeal. In support of the application, an
affidavit of the Tahsildar has been filed. It is stated in the
affidavit that, pursuant to the order dated 09.03.2022,
passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition
No.55072/2018, the file was placed before the higher
authorities to take decision in the matter. It is further
stated that, subsequently a decision was taken to prefer
an appeal against the order passed by the learned Single
Judge.
12. On perusal of the affidavit accompanying the
application, it is seen that, there are no satisfactory
grounds to condone the said delay of 577 days in
preferring the appeal. Accordingly, IA.No.1/2023 stands
rejected.
13. It is contended by the learned HCGP appearing
for the appellant-State that respondent No.4 - Assistant
Commissioner has passed the order dated 11.11.2016,
vide Annexure-T, setting aside the grant order dated
18.08.2007 and 06.09.2007, passed by the
- 9 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
Tahsildar/Secretary, Land Regularisation Committee,
Devanahalli, on the ground that the land in question,
which was granted in favour of the petitioner, was situated
within 18 KMs of the outer boundary of the BBMP area
and that the original grant certificate was not available on
record.
14. It is contended that, if the learned Single Judge
found that the impugned order at Annexure-T passed by
respondent No.4-Assistant Commissioner was
unsustainable, the matter ought to have been remitted to
respondent No.4 to consider the matter afresh. It is
further contended that the land in question was reserved
for public purpose. Hence, on these grounds, prayed to
allow the appeal and set aside the order dated
09.03.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge.
15. We have heard the learned HCGP appearing for
the appellant-State and perused the materials on record.
16. The subject land measuring 3 acres 7 acres
belonging to the petitioner, situated in Survey
- 10 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
No.146/P-35 of Gangavara Chowdappanahalli Village,
Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, was
regularised by the Committee for Regularisation of
Unauthorised Cultivation of the Lands. Further, by virtue
of the order passed in Writ Petition No.715/2008, the
saguvali chit was issued in favour of the petitioner.
Further, in view of the orders passed in Writ Petition
No.22764/2009, the katha was mutated in the name of
the petitioner. Subsequently, in view of the order passed
in Writ Petition No.25172/2012, phodi and durasthi in
respect of the subject land was done.
17. It is the main contention of the appellant-State
that, Assistant Commissioner has set aside the order of
the Regularisation Committee and grant made on
18.08.2007 and 06.09.2007 on the ground that the
records were not available and further, since the land in
question was within 18 KMs of the outer boundary of the
BBMP area.
18. It is seen from the records that, pursuant to the
regularisation of the said land measuring 3 acres 7 guntas,
- 11 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
in Survey No.146/P-35, the authorities have taken steps
to issue saguvali chit, mutated the name of the petitioner
in the revenue records and also done phodi and durasthi
in respect of the subject land. In all the said proceedings,
no where it was mentioned by the authorities that the
original records were not available and the land in
question was within 18 KMs of the outer boundary of the
BBMP area.
19. The appellant-State has failed to produce any
materials to substantiate the fact that, as of the year
2007, when the regularisation of unauthorised occupation
was initially done, the subject land was within 18 KMs of
the outer boundary of the BBMP area. Further, it is
strange to note that the impugned order at Annexure-T
was passed behind the back of the petitioner, without
putting the petitioner on notice and without affording an
opportunity of being heard.
20. Since the respondent-authorities have
implemented all the directions which were issued in the
various proceedings initiated by the petitioner without
- 12 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
raising these specific objections and have issued the
saguvali chit, mutated the name of the petitioner in the
revenue records and done phodi and durasthi in respect of
the subject land and as there is no whisper in the
impugned order at Annexure-T with respect to the land
being within 18 KMs of the outer boundary of the BBMP
area, the Writ Appeal preferred with such a fresh
contention on facts cannot be entertained.
21. For the reasons stated supra, we are of the
considered opinion that on merits as well, no error can be
found with the findings, reasoning and conclusions arrived
at by the learned Single Judge.
22. Since no acceptable reasons have been assigned
by the appellant-State seeking condonation of delay of
577 days in preferring the appeal, IA.No.1/2023 filed for
condonation of delay is dismissed and also as the
appellant-State has not filed applications seeking
condonation of delay in filing the application to bring the
legal heirs of the deceased petitioner on record and to
- 13 -
WA No.1498 of 2023
set aside the abatement, IA.No.1/2026 filed for
impleadment is dismissed.
Consequently, the appeal is devoid of merits, and the
same is dismissed.
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand
disposed of .
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(K.S.BHARATH KUMAR)
JUDGE
bk/