MARYJOHN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) GRANTS made by Government in respect of gomal lands located in the villages within the revenue jurisdiction of Jala Hobli have been subject-matter of non-ending litigation and also fertile breeding ground for corruption and nepotism, what with revenue officials acting in an arbitrary, irregular and whimsical manner. But nevertheless persons claiming interest in such revenue lands keep invoking their jurisdiction and try to manipulate the revenue records. Such persons in order to strike at their competitors or rival claimants and to wriggle out of the long inevitable delay in the process of getting favourable orders from the Civil Court, which alone is competent to declare title in favour of persons claiming interest in respect of immovable property whether the land originally was a Government land or otherwise, time and again invoke the revenue jurisdiction despite this Court emphatically ruling that the revenue authorities can neither confer title nor take away title by their orders. Persons claiming right, title and interest even in such lands which were originally Government lands and later claim title on the premise such Government lands have been granted in favour of one or the other persons and such persons indulged in a series of sale transactions etc., do not believe in approaching the Civil Court for asserting their rights but keep invoking the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities and end up before this Court in a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, under the mistaken impression that because a proceeding is brought to High Court they can get their title declared in writ jurisdiction either under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ jurisdiction is only for judicial review of administrative action and not for declaring title in favour of private persons and at any rate the High Court can never declare title while exercising writ jurisdiction whether in favour of private persons or in favour of the State as such an exercise inevitably involves ascertaining disputed facts, recording findings of facts after enabling parties to lead evidence etc.

(2.) PROCEEDINGS under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are only for reviewing the action of an administrative authority or a statutory authority on the touchstone of statutory provisions whether the action taken or orders passed are law conforming and have been brought about in a proper manner and in adherence with the principles of natural justice and if the orders are likely to take away the existing rights of parties.

(3.) WHAT a sad day for the rule of law and our governance in a country wedded to rule of law and a governance under the Constitution and laws, if such things keep recurring, it is only a reflection of the incompetence of the Government and lack of political will on the part of the State to correct a malady.