LAWS(KAR)-1991-10-9

RAMAMMA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN

Decided On October 03, 1991
RAMAMMA Appellant
V/S
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order made by the assistant commissioner at Annexure 'a' and also another order made earlier at Annexure 'b' and he has sought for quashing the same. Indeed, the petitioner has also sought for quashing the order of the deputy commissioner in the appeal at Annexure 'c for the reasons set out in the writ petition.

(2.) a few facts that are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are asfollows: small piece of land measuring 2 acres 12 guntas in sy. No. 89/10 of belagumba village, kasaba hobli, arsikere taluk, hassan district, came to be granted in favour of marigaiah, husband of the petitioner by the competent authority under the Mysore land grant rules by an order made on 17-11-1947, subject to certain conditions. One such condition was that the grantee shall not alienate the granted land to any person at any time. The fact remains that out of granted land, 1 acre came to be sold in favour of late T.S. lingappa, 3rd respondent herein by a registered sale deed dated 8-10-1970, and the remaining granted land came to be sold in favour of the 4th respondent-chikkanna, by a registered sale deed dated 26-8-1971, for valuable consideration. Thus, 2 acres 12 guntas of land came to be alienated in their favour. Accordingly the purchasers have been enjoying the land in question from the dates of sale.

(3.) after the coming into force of the Karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), suo motu action was taken by the assistant commissioner, hassan sub-division, 2nd respondent herein, in proceedings No. Lnd SC & ST 78 (ask) 87:1979-80. These proceedings came to be initiated based upon the report sent up by the tahsildar on 18-8-1979. After initiating the proceedings suo motu, the assistant commissioner proceeded to pass an order on 22nd may, 1980, as per Annexure 'b'. In that order all that the assistant commissioner stated was that the granted land came to be sold after the expiry of 15 years. Therefore, there was no need for taking further action the matter.