KARNATAKA v. (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP)
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Land Reforms Act
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In view of the above, the revenue authorities to restore the name of the petitioners in the revenue record. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14457 WP No. 27384 of 2024
- Para 66. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory application, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7
Judgment
(BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR R., ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONERS
#1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560001. - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14457 WP No. 27384 of 2024
#2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130.
#3. THE TAHSILDAR MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563130. (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP) …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER AND GRANT THEM THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON 27.07.2016 BY THE R-2 IN LRF (c.R).163/2012-13 PRODUCED AT ANNX-A, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER
#1. An order of vesting passed by the Assistant Commissioner for contravention of Section 79A and 79B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 ("the Act", for short) is challenged in this petition. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14457 WP No. 27384 of 2024
#2. The Assistant Commissioner proceeded to pass the impugned order on the ground that the petitioners have not produced any relevant documents despite service of notice. In essence, the impugned order passed was without hearing or without considering the claims of the purchasers. Since the order of vesting would take away the rights of the ownership of land in question, the appropriate course would be to afford one more opportunity to the petitioners.
#3. In the normal course, the matter would have to be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner, since Sections 79A & B of the Act were omitted by virtue of an amendment to the Land Reforms Act, no useful purpose would be served by remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner and hence, the impugned proceedings initiated shall stand abated.
#4. In view of the above, the revenue authorities to restore the name of the petitioners in the revenue record. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14457 WP No. 27384 of 2024
#5. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.
#6. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory application, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.