GANGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) in this petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of india, the petitioner has challenged the correctness and legality of the order passed by the tahsildar at Annexure-C and he has sought for quashing the same for the reasons set out in the petition.

(2.) in order to appreciate the contentions advanced by the learned counsel on both sides and also refer the salient features necessary to dispose of the writ petition, following events are required to be noted. It is undisputed that out of eight survey numbers of land situate in two villages, in the writ petition we are concerned only with survey number 62 to the extent of 1 acre 27 guntas situate in the village doddachinnahalli, bangarpet taluk. It is also not in dispute that the said land belongs to the village office-thoti. When several lands including survey No. 62 were being enjoyed by the original holders of the village offices for a long time, by a registered sale deed dated 10-2-1975 gangappa-petitioner herein and his mother Smt. Gangamma wife of venkatappa sold this 1 acre 27 guntas of land in survey No. 62 in favour of the third respondent narayana reddy for a valuable consideration. It is stated that ever since the date of sale the said purchaser has been in possession and enjoyment of the same.

(3.) on the coming into force of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), petitioner gangappa and other holders of village offices who were discharging duties of the village offices and enjoying the lands, approached the tahsildar, bangarpet seeking an order of regrant in their favour in respect of the lands endowed upon the village offices including survey No. 62. Earlier there was an order made by the tahsildar regranting occupancy rights in favour of the petitioner and others in respect of certain lands including survey No. 62, which was the subject matter of an appeal before the learned district judge, kolar. Learned additional district judge, kolar by his order dated 27-7-1990, having set aside the order impugned therein, remitted the matter to the tahsildar with a direction to reconsider the case afresh providing opportunity to the appellant as well as the claimants and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.