Facts
The petitioners challenged Tahsildar orders dated 25 July 2024 concerning lands in Sy. No. 87 at Uganavadi Village, Devanahalli Taluk, and sought restoration of revenue entries in their favour
Source reference: p. 9, 12–13They relied on land-grant orders, including a grant dated 7 March 2004 said to have followed a resolution of the competent Regularization Committee
Source reference: p. 10–11The petitions also challenged earlier Assistant Commissioner orders that had led to the Tahsildar’s reconsideration of the matters
Source reference: p. 10–12The State sought to sustain the impugned orders
Source reference: p. 11Issues
1. Whether the Assistant Commissioner had authority to issue the earlier orders concerning land already granted pursuant to a resolution of the competent Regularization Committee
Source reference: p. 10–122. Whether the Tahsildar could pass the impugned orders dated 25 July 2024, or had become functus officio in the circumstances
Source reference: p. 10–12Law Applied
The Court considered Rule 108-D(6) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, in relation to the authority of the Regularization Committee and its Secretary
Source reference: p. 12It held that, where the land grant had been made pursuant to a resolution of the competent Committee, the Assistant Commissioner lacked authority to issue the impugned earlier orders; further, the Tahsildar, as Secretary to the Committee, had become functus officio
Source reference: p. 11–12The petitions were brought under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
Source reference: p. 3, 8Reasoning
The Court accepted that the subject lands had been granted to the petitioners by an order dated 7 March 2004 pursuant to a resolution of the competent Committee
Source reference: p. 11Applying Rule 108-D(6), it concluded that the Assistant Commissioner had no authority to issue the earlier orders concerning those grants
Source reference: p. 11–12It also held that the Tahsildar, as the Committee’s Secretary, had become functus officio and therefore could not pass the challenged orders dated 25 July 2024
Source reference: p. 12The Court accordingly found merit in the petitioners’ challenge
Source reference: p. 12Holding
The Court allowed all four writ petitions and set aside the Tahsildar’s orders dated 25 July 2024 concerning the subject lands
It issued a writ of mandamus directing the Tahsildar, Devanahalli Taluk, to restore the revenue entries in the petitioners’ favour within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order
Source reference: p. 13Original Court PDF
SMT. NAGAMANIvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
