RAMACHANDRA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate, who accepts notice for the respondents, are heard for final disposal. The petitioners have filed this petition for a direction to the Tahsildar, Shivamogga Taluk, Shivamogga [the fourth respondent], to place their applications before the Committee for regularization of unauthorized occupation for Shivamogga Taluk, Shivamogga District [the fifth respondent].

(2.) While the learned counsel for the petitioner would urge in support of the petition relying upon certain circumstances asserted in the petition, the learned Additional Government Advocate submits that, during the pendency of this petition, the petitioners' applications have been considered by the fifth respondent in its Meeting on 16/4/2021 and the fifth respondent has resolved to reject the applications in the light of the fact that the subject lands are within five kilometers from the Municipal limits of Shivamogga and the subject lands are acquired for the benefit of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board. However, the fifth respondent has resolved for payment of ex-gratia compensation to each of the petitioners.

(3.) The learned Additional Government Advocate, in support of this submission, seeks leave to place on record a copy of the endorsement dtd. 16/4/2021, and he is permitted accordingly and a copy of the resolution dtd. 16/4/2021 is taken on record. In the circumstances of the case and the subsequent resolution by the fifth respondent on 16/4/2021, the petition must be disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to either seek ex-gratia payment in terms of the fifth respondent's resolution dtd. 16/4/2021 or to impugn the same in the manner known to law. The petitioners have their remedy against the fifth respondent's resolution dtd. 16/4/2021 Sec. 108- D(6) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1996. Therefore, the following: