LAWS(KAR)-1990-10-29

GOPALAPPA Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

Decided On October 10, 1990
GOPALAPPA Appellant
V/S
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) a common question of law namely as to whether the petitioner acquired any right pursuant to an agreement of sale executed by the erstwhile holders of village offices in respect of an erstwhile service inam, land in favour of each of the petitioners after the land stood vested in the state under the Provisions of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1963 arises for consideration in these writ petitions.

(2.) the facts of the case are these: the contesting respondents in each of these petitions were holders of inferior village offices under the Mysore village offices Act, 1908. Certain service inam lands were attached as emoluments to the concerned village offices. The Mysore village offices Act, 1908 was repealed by the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961. Section 4 of the act abolished all the hereditary village offices and also extinguished all the emoluments attached thereto. The act was given effect to with effect from 1-2-1963. Notwithstanding the abolition of the village offices and the extinguishment of the emoluments attached thereto which included service inam lands, Section 5 of the act provided for the regrant of the land resumed to the government under Section 4 of the Act, to the holders of erstwhile village offices. In terms of Section 5 of the Act, the contesting respondents in each of these cases applied for regrant of the lands in their favour. But even as those applications were pending agreements were entered into by each of them in favour of each of the concerned petitioner, agreeing to sell the erstwhile service inam lands the particulars of which are as follow:

(3.) after the above agreements and after the petitioners were put in possession, an amendment was introduced into the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961, by act No. 13 of 1978. Sub-section (6) introduced into Section 5 and Section 7a of the act are relevant for this case. They read-