NINGAPPA BSAPPA HARIJAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioners claim that they are landless agriculturists belonging to scheduled caste/tribes. They were granted different extent of lands in sy. Nos. 2 and 7 of naganoor village. They claim that lands were government lands. They are aggrieved by the grant of occupancy rights in favour of the 5th respondent.

(2.) the 5th respondent filed form 7 for grant of occupancy rights in the aforementioned lands under the Provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 and rules framed thereunder. The land tribunal has rejected her application by its order at Annexure-E , dated 20-1-1977. The appeal filed by the 5th respondent against the order of the land tribunal was allowed by the erstwhile land reforms appellate authority by its order at Annexure-F , dated 23-12-1988, the order of land tribunal was set aside and 5th respondent was granted occupancy rights in respect of the lands in question. Pursuant to the same, certificate in form 10 under Karnataka land reforms rules as per Annexure-H has been granted in favour of the 5th respondent. Thereafter, the notice at Annexure-J was issued by the village accountant that mutation was made in the name of 5th respondent in respect of the land in question on the basis of grant of occupancy rights in her favour by the erstwhile land reforms appellate authority. Petitioners are seeking to quash annexures-h and j and to declare the grant of occupancy rights in favour of 5th respondent as null and void contending that the lands are the government lands and therefore they are not tenanted lands as the original grantee of the land has contravened the terms and conditions of the grant and therefore the lands were resumed to the government.

(3.) the petitioners have not sought for quashing the order at Annexure-F of the land reforms appellate authority granting occupancy rights in favour of 5th respondent. However, they have sought to declare the grant of occupancy rights in her favour as null and void. As long as Annexure-F is in force, the occupancy right granted in favour of the 5th respondent in respect of the land in question will continue. The prayers of the petitioners are improper. On this ground alone the writ petitions are liable to be quashed.