SRI. SHIVEGOWDA v. COURT OF KARNATAKA

Judgment

#7. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU -560 001. THE TAHSILDAR PERIYAPATNA TALUK PERIYAPATNA MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. THE LAND GRANT COMMITTEE FOR REGULARISATION OF UN-AUTHORISED CULTIVATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PERIYAPATNA TALUK PERIYAPATNA MYSURU DISTRICT-571107.

SMT. SAROJAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS W/O LATE A.G. SWAMY SHETTY. SRI. A.S. VRUSHABENDRA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O LATE A.G. SWAMY SHETTY. SRI. A.S. PRASANNA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O LATE A.G. SWAMY SHETTY. SRI. YADIYURU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 S/O LATE A.G. SWAMY SHETY. RESPONDENTS NO. 4 TO 7 ARE R/AT SANKETHA BEEDI, NEAR POST OFFICE BETTADAPURA TOWN PERIYAPATNA TALUK. MYSURU DISTRICT -571 107.

#8. YADIYURU SHETTY SINCE DECEASED REP. BY LRS. 8(a). SMT. ARATHI W/O LATE YADIYURU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 8(b). AMITHA S/O LATE YADIYURU SHETTY. AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS. 8(c). THANU AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS S/O ATE YADIYURU SHETTY. RESPONDENTS NO.8(a) TO 8(c) ARE R/AT SANKETHA BEEDI, NEAR POST OFFICE BETTADAPURA TOWN PERIYAPATNA TALUK. MYSURU DISTRICT -571 107. (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. VISHWANATH R. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R8(a-c)) …RESPONDENTS HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3, THE LAND GRANT COMMITTEE FOR REGULARIZATION OF UNAUTHORIZED CULTIVATION, TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER APPLICATION DATED

05.05.1992, MADE IN FORM NO.53, FOR REGULARISATION OF UNAUTHORIZED CULTIVATION OF HTE LAND BEARING SY.NO.425/1-2 OF HASUVINAKAVALU VILLAGE, HARNAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT. THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR HAVING MADE THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.53, IS SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC. IN WP NO. 11285/2020 BETWEEN:

#1. SRI. SHIVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA R/AT RAGAIALAMARA VILLAGE, HAMLET VILLAGE OF HASAVINA KAVAL HARNAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.S. NAGARAJ AND MALLAPPA S. NACHAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND:

#1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. THE LAND GRAND COMMITTEE FOR REGULARIZATION OF UN AUTHORIZED CULTIVATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PERIYA PATNA TALUK, PERIYAPATNA MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. THE THASILDAR PERIYAPATANA TALUK, PERIYAPATANA MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. SMT. SAROJAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, W/O LATE A.G. SWAMY SHETTY. SRI. A.S. VRUSHABENDRA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O LATE A.G.SWAMY SHETTY. SRI. A.S. PRASANNA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O LATE A.G.SWAMY SHETTY. SMT. A.S.SHEELA AGED 47 YEARS, D/O LATE A.G.SWAMY SHETTY

#7. RESPONDENTS NO.4 TO 7 ARE R/AT SANKETHA BEEDA, NEAR BUS STAND HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 BETTADAPURA TOWN, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571107.

#8. YADIYURU SHETTY SINCE DECEASED REP. BY LRS. 8(a). SMT. ARATHI W/O LATE YADIYURU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 8(b). SRI. AMITHA S/O LATE YADIYURU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS. 8(c)/ SRI. THANU S/O LATE YADIYURU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.8(a-c) ARE R/AT SANKETHA BEEDA, NEAR BUS STAND BETTADAPURA TOWN, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571107. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. VISHWANATHA R. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R7, R8(a) TO (c)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DATED 19.09.1994, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 LAND GRANT COMMITTEE, COPY OF HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 THE SAID RESOLUTION IS SUBMITTED HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-A AND THE SAGUVALI CHIT DATED 26.08.1996 MADE IN REF. ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 - THASILDAR, IN CONSIDERATION OF FORM NO.50, FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS HUSBAND, LATE A.G.SWAMY SHETTY, FOR GRANTING THE LAND MEASURING 1.00 ACRE OF LAND IN SY.NO.425, OF HASAVINA KAVAL VILLAGE, COPY SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURE-B. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER

#1. In W.P. No. 1785 of 2020, the petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to consider and regularise the alleged unauthorised occupation in terms of Form No.53 filed by the petitioner.

#2. In W.P. No. 11285 of 2020, the petitioner is assailing the Resolution dated 19.09.1994 (Annexure- A) passed by respondent No.2–Land Grant Committee and Saguvali Chit dated 26.08.1996 issued by HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 respondent No.3–Tahsildar in favour of the husband of respondent No.4, as per Annexure-B.

#3. Since the question involved in these writ petitions relates to the application made by the petitioner seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation of the land, both the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

#4. Heard Sri. Nagaraja B.S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State; and Sri. Vishwanath R. Hegde, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 8.

#5. Sri. Nagaraj B.S., learned counsel for the petitioner, referred the application dated

05.05.1992 (in W.P.No.1785 of 2020) filed by the petitioner, produced at Annexure-A, bearing HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 Registration No.1086, along with the sketch appended thereto, and submitted that the petitioner is in possession of the land in question for more than 20 years. He further referred to the mahazar produced at Annexure-B to the writ petition. It was also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent-authorities committed an error in not clubbing the application filed by the petitioner with the application filed by the private respondents herein. Therefore, the entire proceedings before respondent-Committee are contrary to the declaration of law made by this Court in the case of Smt. Radha Bai vs. Smt. Shashikala and others reported in ILR 1998 KAR 302. Accordingly, he sought interference by this Court.

#6. Per contra, Sri. Vishwanath R. Hegde, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 8, submitted that the HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 land in question has been granted in favour of A.G. Swamy Shetty and that the same is evident from the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.223 of 2019 (in W.P.No.1785 of 2025 at Statement of Objections vide Annexure-R3). Therefore, he contended that the grant made in favour of the original grantee is just and proper and does not call for interference in these writ petitions.

#7. Smt. B. P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate, referring to the acknowledgment produced at Annexure-A in W.P.No.1785 of 2025, submitted that the petitioner has created the said document for the purpose of claiming the land in question, as Registration No.1086 pertains to the land bearing Sy. Nos.35 and 63 of Doddavare Village, in an application filed by one Thimmaiah, son of Dasappa. Therefore, it was contended that the petitioner has not approached HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 this Court with clean hands and, accordingly, sought dismissal of the writ petitions.

#8. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and upon careful consideration of the writ papers, it is evident that the petitioner is claiming regularisation of unauthorised occupation of the land bearing Sy. No.425 of Hasuvinakavalu Village, Piriyapatna Taluk, Mysuru District.

#9. It is the contention of the learned Additional Government Advocate the acknowledgment produced at Annexure-A, bearing Registration No.1086 and dated 05.05.1992, pertains to the land bearing Sy. Nos.35 and 63 of Doddavare Village. Upon perusal of the records, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands. HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 12 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020

#10. It is also noted from the records that the land in question has been granted in favour of one A.G. Swamy Shetty and that the Trial Court, by its judgment dated 20.09.2025 in O.S. No.223 of 2019 (Annexure-R3), has arrived at a conclusion that the grantees were in possession of the land in question for a considerable period in respect of the very same subject land.

#11. In that view of the matter, taking consideration that the acknowledgment relied upon by the petitioner at Annexure-A in W.P.No.1785 of 2020, bearing Registration No.1086, pertains to a different village and an altogether different survey number, the question of considering the application said to have been made by the petitioner by the respondent- authorities does not arise. Therefore, the judgment relied upon by the petitioner cannot be accepted. HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 13 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020

#12. It is also to be noted that the petitioner has challenged the grant made in favour of the husband of respondent No.4 in W.P. No.11285 of 2020. Upon perusal of the writ papers, it is evident that the petitioner has failed to produce the sale deed under which the husband of respondent No.4 allegedly sold the land granted in his favour.

#13. The petitioner has relied upon Annexures-G1 to G4 (RTC extracts) in support of his contention challenging the grant alleged to have been made in favour of respondent No.4. However, a perusal of Annexures-G1 to G4 does not disclose that the lands mentioned therein are the lands that were granted in favour of the husband of respondent No.4.

#14. The lands bearing Sy. Nos.1/32, 1/33 and 1/45 of Hasuvinakavalu Village are the self-acquired properties of the husband of respondent No.4. HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010012742020 - 14 - NC: 2026:KHC:39303 WP No. 1785 of 2020 C/W WP No. 11285 of 2020 Further, Annexure-G3 refers to land bearing Sy. No.430, which respondent No.4 claims to be the self- acquired property of her husband. In that view of the matter, the contention raised by the petitioner in W.P. No.11285 of 2020 cannot be accepted.

#15. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45