SHANTHAKUMAR Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, the appellant has called in question, the correctness of the Order dated 25th october 1999 made in Writ Petition No. 37399 of 1999 by the learned Single Judge. The learned single Judge in the impugned order has confirmed the Order dated 10th August 1999 made in ptl. 9/00-2000, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-B to this Appeal, by 1st respondent- Deputy Commissioner (hereinafter referred to as ' the Deputy Commissioner', confirming the order dated 3rd April 1999 made in PTCL No. 82/95-96, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure -A to this Appeal, passed by the 2nd respondent Assistant commissioner [hereinafter referred to as 'the Assistants Commissioner']. The Assistant commissioner in his Order dated 3rd April 1999 has declared the sale of land measuring 5. 00 acres in Survey No. 131 of Siragunda Village, Gonibidu made by means of a registered sale deed dated 13th April 1964 by one Hongaiah S/o Chikkaiah and Rangaiah S/o Halagaiah in favour of k. M. Chandrashekaraiah and K. M. Shivashankaraiah as null and void. In the said order he has further held that the land in question should be resumed to the State Government and the original grantee should be put in possession.

(2.) FACTS in brief, which are not in serious dispute and which may be relevant for the disposal of this Appeal, may be stated as hereunder: the land measuring 5 acres in Survey No. 131 of Shiragonda Village, Gonibidu was originally granted in favour of Sri Hongaiah S/o Rangaiah by the State Government by means of grant order dated 31st March 1954 subject to the conditions provided under Rule 43 (8) of the Land grant Rules framed by the then Maharaja of Mysore, in exercise of the power conferred on him under Section 233 of the Land Revenue Act [hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules']. The grantee of the said land, it is not in serious dispute, belonged to the depressed class. The Rule governing the grant of the said land at the relevant time prohibited alienation of the granted land forever. However, by a subsequent amendment made to Rule 43 (8) of the Rules, the alienation of the land was prohibited for a period of 30 years from the date of the grant. The document of title issued to the original grantee prohibited the alienation of land for a period of ten years from the date of issue of title deed on 31st March 1954. The State of Karnataka passed an Act known as the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands)Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. The said Act came into force with effect from 1st january 1979. Section 4 of the act provides that notwithstanding anything in law, agreement, contract or instrument, any transfer of granted land made either before or after the commencement of this Act, in contravention of the terms of the grant of such land or the law providing for such grant or Sub-section (2) to Section 4 of the Act, shall be null and void and no right title, or interest in such land shall be conveyed not be deemed ever to have been conveyed by such transfer. Section 5 of the Act confers power on the Assistant Commissioner to resume the granted land, on enquiry if he is satisfied that the transfer of alienation of the granted land was made in contravention of the terms of the grant. It is useful to extract Section 4 and 5 of the act, which reads as hereunder:

(3.) THE respondents 3 and 4 who claim to be the legal heirs of the original grantee, subsequent to the coming into force of the Act, made an application for declaration of the sale of the land made by them as null and void and for a further direction to evict the appellant from the said land and put them in possession of the same. The Assistant Commissioner, after notice to the appellant who was the subsequent purchaser of the said land, passed order Annexure B dated 3rd April 1999, declaring that the sale of the land in question as null and void and further directing the resumption of the said land in favour of the State and also directing that the respondents 2 and 3 should be put in possession of the said land. The Appeal filed before the Deputy Commissioner having been dismissed, the appellant approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 37399 of 1999. As noticed by us earlier, the learned Single Judge, in the impugned order, has dismissed the Writ petition confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner as well as the Assistant commissioner. Aggrieved by the said order, this Appeal is filed.