PHILIP STEPHEN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned AGA appearing for respondents - State are heard.

(2.) Petitioner claims to be an ex-serviceman having served in Indian Defence (Indian Navy) as LME and got discharged on 29.04.1998. The grievance of the petitioner is that, after his retirement, he made an application seeking grant of land in Sy.No.28 of Hodachalli village, Hanubalu Hobli, Sakaleshpura Taluk, Hassan District. Respondent No.4 / Tahsildar, Sakaleshpura Taluk, on 18.09.2014 sent a notice to the petitioner calling upon him to produce various documents and to furnish various details as mentioned in the said notice vide Annexure-'E', in order to consider his application. On receipt of the said notice, petitioner produced the documents and furnished the details vide letter dated 22.11.2014 (Annexure-'F'). Thereafter, the petitioner did not receive any information from the respondents. Like petitioner, other ex- servicemen and soldiers who had applied for grant of land also did not receive any information from the respondents and hence, the Vice Chairman of the National Ex-servicemen Co-ordination Committee and the Chairman of the Sakaleshpura Unit Sri.T.P.Krishnan filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.31479/2017 (KLR-RES). The said writ petition having been dismissed, the matter was taken up in appeal and the Division Bench of this Court, by its order dated 12.09.2019 in Writ Appeal No.1196/2018 (KLR-RES), allowed the appeal with the observation that, in view of the submission made by learned AGA, an extent of 1189 acres is available to notify in compliance with Rule 5 of the Karnataka Land Grant rules. The Division Bench further directed that the same shall be notified for the purpose of pursuing the applications filed by various ex-servicemen. The respondent No.4 forwarded this order to respondent No.3 apprising him of the factual position and once again recommended for grant of land, as per his letter dated 01.01.2020 vide Annexure-'J'. After a lapse of five months from the date of final order, respondent No.4 issued a notice as per Annexure-'A'. The petitioner is aggrieved by condition No.13 incorporated in the said notice, whereby the petitioner is called upon to submit a report from the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner with regard to possessing or non-possessing of any land and to furnish a report to the effect that he has not been granted land under ex-servicemen quota.

(3.) It is the contention of the petitioner that incorporation of condition No.13 in Annexure-'A' is illegal, unconstitutional and unreasonable. The impugned condition is ultra vires the Act and Rule 8 of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules. Rule 8 of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules stipulates the conditions which every applicant seeking grant of land is required to comply with. The conditions stipulated in Rule 8 are also reflected in the notice issued by respondent No.4 at Annexure-'A' and therefore, the impugned condition is redundant and unwarranted. That apart, the impugned condition No.13 overrides condition No.4 inasmuch as the applicant is called upon to submit a report from the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner with regard to possessing or non-possessing of any land. The particulars called for by respondent No.4 under condition No.13 are impracticable. In order to comply with the said condition, the petitioner has to visit each village accountant office in a taluk and each taluk office in a district. That apart, by the notice at Annexure-'A', the applicant has been threatened with deterrent action of rejecting the application, if the required documents and details are not furnished on or before 24.03.2020. Thus, petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash condition No.13 stipulated in the notice dated 26.02.2020 vide Annexure-'A' and a writ of mandamus directing respondents to grant 5 acres of land in Sy.No.28 of Hodachalli village, Hanubalu hobli, Sakaleshpura taluk, Hassan district to the petitioner.