BALAPPA S/O HANUMANTHA @ HANUMANPPA vs THE GENERAL MANAGER AND ORS

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA


KALABURAGI BENCH

TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

WRIT PETITION NO. 202526 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:
BALAPPA
S/O HANUMANTHA @ HANUMANPPA
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: NILL
R/O OOTI VILLAGE, TQ: DEVADURGA
DIST: RAICHUR-584101
…PETITIONER






(BY SRI. MAHADEV S PATIL., ADVOCATE)

AND:
1. THE GENERAL MANAGER
HUTTI GOLD MINES COMPANY LIMITED
HUTTI, TALUK LINGASUGUR
DISTRICT RAICHUR-584101

2. THE VIGILANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER, HUTTI GOLD MINES COMPANY LIMITED
HUTTI, TALUK LINGASUGUR
DISTRICT RAICHUR-584101

3. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
NO.2, HUTTI GOLD MINES COMPANY LIMITED
HUTTI, TALUK LINGASUGUR
DISTRICT RAICHUR-584101




Digitally signed
by SWETA
KULKARNI
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
HUTTI GOLD MINES COMPANY LIMITED HUTTI,
RD
REGISTERED OFFICE 3 FLOOR, KHB COMPLEX,
NATIONAL GAMES, KORAMANGAL
BENGLAURU-560001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL ADV., FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL
FOR RECORDS AND ISSUE: I) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
OR ANY OTHER ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE QUASHING
ENDORSEMENT DATED 30.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.3 AT ANNEXURE-J; II) ISSUE ANY WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER
THE CASE OF PETITIONER FOR JOB AS PER THE VIDE
ANNEXURE-D, E AND F DATED 13.07.2020 AND 16.07.2020
THIS HONOURABLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“ i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other order in
the like nature quashing endorsement dated
30.08.2022 issued by the respondent No.3 at
Annexure-J in the interest of justice and equity.
ii) Issue any writ of mandamus or any other
order in the like nature directing the respondent
authorities to consider the case of petitioner for job
as per the vide Annexure-D, E and F dated

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


13.07.2020 and 16.07.2020 this Hon’ble Court
deems fit in circumstances of the ends of justice.”


2. Sri.Mahadev S. Patil, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s land bearing
Sy.No.42/B measuring 1 acre 34 guntas, situated at Ooti
Village, Deodurga Taluk, Raichur District was acquired for
the benefit of respondent No.4-Company. As per the policy
of respondent No.4, the land loser would be entitled to one
employment with respondent No.4. However, they failed
to provide employment to the petitioner. Hence, the
petitioner and his father filed a writ petition in
WP.No.201006/2021, wherein this Court issued direction
to the respondent-Company to consider their
representations in accordance with law. It is further
submitted that the respondent-Company has now issued
an endorsement indicating that the job has been provided
to Siddappa, son of Hanumappa. However, it has failed to
appreciate the fact that the said employment is provided

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


in respect of the land acquired from the uncle of the
petitioner. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition.


3. Per contra, Sri.Veeranagouda Malipatil, learned
counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, vehemently
opposes the writ petition and submits that the writ petition
is liable to be rejected solely on the ground of suppression
of material facts, as the petitioner and his father have
suppressed the fact that they have given an undertaking
and an affidavit before the respondent-Company, stating
that the father of the petitioner has no objection to
provide employment to the petitioner's cousin. In support
of his contention, he has filed an affidavit of the General
Manager, along with the relevant documents and further
submits that, since the employment has already been
provided to the petitioner's cousin in respect of the
acquired land, the petitioner cannot claim another
employment. It is submitted that the father of the
petitioner had undertaken before respondent No.4 that he

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


would not claim any employment. Hence, he seeks to
dismiss the petition.


4. I have heard the arguments of the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing
for the respondents and meticulously perused the material
available on record.


5. The material on record indicates that the land
bearing Sy.No.42/2 (42/B), measuring 1 acre 34 guntas
was owned by the father of the petitioner, as is evident
from the revenue records produced at Annexures-A, A1
and A2. The State Government acquired the land in
question for the benefit of respondent No.4-Company vide
notification dated 18.04.1995. The Assistant
Commissioner, Raichur passed the awards in respect of
the subject land on 16.05.1998 and 22.05.1998.
Respondent No.4 has evolved a policy, namely, the HGML
Recruitment Rules, 2012 for the appointment of land

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


losers/family members. It would be useful to extract Rule
3b, 4B and 4C of the said Rules.
“ 3. DEFINITIONS :


b) “ Khatedar ” means the owner of
the land at the time of final
notification whose land has been
acquired by the company whose
names appear in column 9 of the RTC
(Phani) for the survey
number/numbers.

4. CONDITIONS FOR APPOINTMENT.

*

B. For khatedars lands acquired on or
after commencement of these Rules.
i) One job shall be considered to the
khatedar as per the final notification
of acquisition.
ii) Only Staff & workmen category
jobs will only be considered depending
upon the educational qualification of
the khatedar on his family member.
iii) The eligible khatedar/his family
members shall be appointed initially
as a probationer for a period of two
years and shall be placed/posted in
various sections/departments of the
company depending upon the
necessity and their services shall be
regularized after satisfactory
completion of the training period.

C. 1) Minimum extent of land shall be one
acre

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


2) If Khatedars have five to ten acres
of land, and have lost up to one acre
only for acquisition, such cases shall
not be considered.
3) Even if the acquired land is less
then one acre of land and the said
khatedar possesses only that
particular bit of land for his livelihood,
and does not own any other land in
his name, such cases shall be
considered for jobs.
4) In case of khatedar who have more
than one Survey number in his name
and whose lands have been acquired
shall be considered for only one job.”

(Emphasis Supplied)


6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner's father’s
name has been notified as the khatedar for Sy.No.42/B at
Sl.No.13(2) of the notification dated 13.07.1995. In the
very same notification, at Sl.No.19(4), the name of
Hanumappa, Siddappa S/o Hanumappa is shown for
Sy.No.47/2A.


7. The policy produced by the respondents along
with their objections clearly indicates that a khatedar
means a owner of the land at the time of issuance of final
notification, whose land has been acquired by the

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


Company and whose name appears in Column No.9 of RTC
(Pahani) for the survey number/survey numbers. Rule 4 of
the aforesaid Rules prescribes the condition for
appointment. Rule 4B indicates that one job shall be
considered for the khatedar as per the final notification of
the acquisition. Further, Rule 4C indicates that the
minimum extent of land shall be one acre for providing an
employment and further, in case khatedar, who have more
than one survey number in his name and whose land have
been acquired shall be considered for only one job.


8. Keeping in mind the aforesaid rules formulated
by respondent No.4-Company, the respondent authorities
issued the impugned endorsement, which indicates that
employment had already been provided to the petitioner's
cousin by considering that the petitioner's father and his
uncle are the joint khatedars.


9. It is to be noticed at this stage that the
respondents have filed an affidavit of Sri.Shafiullah Khan

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


In-charge General Manager of the respondent-Company.
Along with the said affidavit, the respondent have
produced the final notification, an affidavit of undertaking
and an agreement executed by the father of the petitioner,
which clearly indicates that the father of the petitioner had
requested respondent No.4 to provide one job to his
nephew i.e. the cousin of the petitioner and he had further
undertaken that he will not claim any employment in
respect of the acquired land.


10. It is interesting to note that contrary to the said
affidavit/undertaking before respondent No.4 and by
suppressing the said fact, the petitioner as well as his
father have filed a writ petition in WP.No.201006/2021,
wherein this Court vide order dated 04.07.2022 has issued
a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent
No.3 to consider the petitioner's representation. The
authorities have considered the representation as directed

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


by this Court and rejected the prayer of the petitioner for

employment.


11. It is to be noticed that the petitioner's father
was very well aware about the existing Rules and taking
note of the same, he has given an undertaking before the
authority that his family would not claim any employment
for the acquired land. Based on such undertaking,
employment was provided to the petitioner's cousin which
can be noticed from the endorsement issued by the
authority which is impugned in the writ petition. The
decision of the respondent authority is strictly
inconsonance with the Rules for appointment of land loser
2012 and as per the affidavit, and undertaking given by
the father of the petitioner. I do not find any error in the
impugned endorsement calling for interference.


12. The contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that Sy.No.47/2A has fallen to the share of the
petitioner’s uncle cannot be appreciated, as the name of

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11559
WP No. 202526 of 2023


CNR: KAHC030081512023


the father of the petitioner is reflected in the notification
for both the survey numbers i.e. Sy.No.42/B as well as
Sy.No.47/2A. As per the Rules if a land loser/Khatedar
owns more than one extent of land, he would be entitled
to only one employment. Considering the said aspect also,
the authorities are fully justified in rejecting the claim of
the petitioner for employment. I do not find any good
ground to interfere with the impugned endorsement.
Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the
same is rejected .


Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE


ABK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2