P.R. BALACHANDRA, S/O P. RAMACHANDRA RAO Vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA-577201, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SAGAR SUB-DIVISION, SAGAR, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577401, THE TAHSILDAR, SAGAR TALUK, SAGAR, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577401 AN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has raised the challenge to the order, dated 26.11.2010 (Annexure -L) passed by the Tahsildar, Sagar Taluk, the order, dated 19.09.2011 (Annexure -N) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Sagar Sub -Division and the order, dated 10.10.2011 (Annexure -P) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner's father Ramachandra Rao purchased the property in question from one Tejappa Shetty in 1981. The said property fell to the share of the petitioner in the family partition. The petitioner demolished the dilapidated structure standing thereon and constructed a residential building after obtaining the sanction of the local body (Bheemanakone Grama Panchayat) for the building plans. When thus stood the state of affairs, the fourth respondent complained to this Court against the petitioner and two others in Public Interest Litigation (W.P. No. 17073/2008) that they have encroached the Government gomal land. He ventilated the public grievance before the Division Bench stating that the representations submitted to the authorities to take action against the petitioner and others have been of no avail. The Division Bench, by its judgment, dated 31.07.2009 (Annexure -H) disposed of the petition with a direction to the Government, Deputy Commissioner and the Tahsildar to issue notice to the petitioner and others and take appropriate action after affording reasonable opportunity to them to give explanation for their unauthorised occupation. In compliance with the Division Bench's judgment, the Tahsildar issued the notice, dated 22.10.2009 (Annexure -J) to which the petitioner submitted his reply, dated 03.11.2009 (Annexure -K). The Tahsildar on considering the petitioner's reply passed the impugned order to remove the structure unauthorisedly raised on the Government land at Sy. No. 121/A of Kerekoppa village within one month. Aggrieved by the said order, dated 26.11.2010 (Annexure -L), the petitioner filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner. The appeal came to be dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner by his order, dated 19.09.2011 (Annexure -N). Thereafter, the petitioner filed the second appeal before the Deputy Commissioner which also came to be dismissed on 10.10.2011 (Annexure -P).

(2.) SRI R.V. Jayaprakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father is a bonafide purchaser of the land from Tejappa Shetty for a lawful consideration. He submits that it is only on verifying the title -deeds and satisfying itself that the local body granted the approval for the building plans. He submits that the Demand Register extracts from 1971 -72 show the names of Tejappa Shetty and many other persons in respect of the properties forming part of kaneshkumari lands, so submits Sri Jayaprakash. He further submits that the land in question is a gramthana land.

(3.) HE has also relied on this Courts decision dated 25.02.2011 passed in W.P. Nos. 34067 -72/2010. He read out paras 11, 13, 19 and 20 which are extracted hereinbelow: