PADMAVATHI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have sought for to quash the order dated 6.2.2004 passed by the 2nd respondent vide Annexure -A. Property in Sy. No. 109/4B2P5 to the extent of 75 cents of Puttur -Kasaba village is the subject matter of dispute in this writ petition The husband of 3rd respondent herein had filed Form No. 7 in respect of the property in question in addition to one more property. However, the 2nd respondent has granted occupancy rights only to the extent of 23 cents in this survey number in his favour. Being not satisfied with the same, the said Janardhan Gowda has moved this Court in W.P. No. 15661/1993, wherein this Court had remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh enquiry. On such remand, the impugned order has been passed granting occupancy rights in respect of above survey number to the extent of 72 cents. The same is under challenge.

(2.) HEARD .

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Chairman of the 2nd respondent -Land Tribunal, after recording the contention of the parties, has noted that the respondents have not proved their tenancy over the schedule land and that the land in question is an agricultural land rather, it is a non -agricultural land. However, three of the members of the Land Tribunal have opined that the land in question is in possession of the respondents and they are residing therein and accordingly, the impugned order has been passed. It appears, one of the members had not given any opinion. Only on the ground that majority of members have supported the case of respondents, the impugned order has been passed without assigning any reasons on the opinion expressed by the members as well as by the Chairman. The order is not a speaking order. Hence, petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Matter is remitted to the Land Tribunal to verify and to record as to whether the land in question, as on 1.3.1974, was a punja land or it was being cultivated and also as to whether the respondents were in possession and cultivation of the said land. Any such finding shall relate back to 01.03.1974 or prior thereto. Thereafter, it shall dispose of the case in accordance with law. All the contentions are left open.