HULAGESHA @ HULAG A. BOVI AND SMT HULIGYAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition lies in a short compass. He is aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner confirmed in appeal by the Deputy. Commissioner insofar as the finding recorded by them to the effect that the land in question was a granted land and the same was sold in favour of the 5th respondent in violation of the provisions of Section 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short 'the Act'). In fact, both the Authorities have concurrently held that the sale made by the original grantee -Late Hanuma Bovi was in violation of the provisions of the Act and therefore, the land in question deserved to be resumed to the Government and restored to the grantee/his legal representatives.

(3.) THE Assistant Commissioner has while holding that the sale was illegal and the land stood resumed to the State Government ordered for restoration of the same in favour of the representatives of the deceased grantee. This order was not challenged by the 5th respondent -purchaser. However, the petitioners herein challenged it before the Deputy Commissioner contending inter alia that the Assistant Commissioner ought to have ordered for restoration of the land in their favour instead of merely saying that the land had to be restored to the legal representatives of the original grantee. The Deputy Commissioner vide his order dated 15.07.2013 has held that as there was a civil suit pending between the petitioners and the 4th respondent with regard to their right to succeed to the estate of deceased Hanuma Bovi as his legal representatives, the said question has to be decided by the Civil Court and the parties have to exhaust their remedy before the Civil Court in that regard. Thus, the Deputy Commissioner has dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.