BASAVVA Vs. SMT. TANGEVVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is by the landlord seeking for quashing of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.1610/2003 dated 30.11.2005 Annexure-A whereunder Form No.7A filed by the tenant is allowed by setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Hubli in KLR7A/UNKAL/SR/22-1998-99 dated 26.09.2003, Annexure-E whereunder said application under Form 7A seeking for grant of land had been dismissed.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Sri.A.P.Murari, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Sri. Anandkumar Magadum for petitioner. Sri.Ajay U.Patil, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3A, 3B and 4 to 10 and Smt.Vidyavathi, learned AGA appearing for R-11 and R-12. I have perused the original records made available by learned Additional Government Advocate.

(3.) One Sri.Kalappa had filed Form No.7A on 26.07.1999 seeking grant of land measuring 34 guntas in Sy.No.589 (Sy.No.66/2), situated at Unnkal village, Hubli Taluk (hereinafter referred to as 'land in question') contending interalia that deceased Kalappa was a tenant of said land and he was cultivating the same during his life time and on his demise, his L.Rs (respondents-1 to 10 herein) are cultivating the same till date. It was also contended that Kalappa had not filed Form No.7 seeking grant of occupancy rights under Section 45 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1974 and as such, after amendment to the said Act and introduction of Section 77A, Form No.7A was filed by deceased Kalappa before competent authority and Assistant Commissioner, Sub Division, Hubli 11th respondent herein. Said authority after issuing notice to the parties and after conducting spot inspection found that the land in question has not been cultivated and entries in the revenue records indicated that land in question is 'pada' (fallow land). It also found that RTC extracts for the years 1994-95 to 2001-02 indicated that in the cultivator's column, entry has been made to the effect 'pada'. Hence, application came to be rejected by order dated 26.09.2003 Annexure-E. Being aggrieved by this order, respondents-1 to 10 herein filed an appeal before Karnataka Appellate Tribunal to Bangalore in appeal No.1610/2003. Appellate Tribunal after issuing notice to writ petitioners herein and after securing original records held that RTCs of land in question for the years 1973-74 to 2001-02 reflected the name of Kalappa in column No.12(2) and nature of cultivation is shown and categorized as 'III' to mean that cultivation is by a tenant. Hence, it came to a conclusion that appellants therein had satisfied that deceased Kalappa was cultivating the land in question as a tenant immediately prior to 01.03.1974 when Act No.1/1974 came into force. It further held that he had continued to be in possession and cultivation of the same when Section 77A of the Act was introduced vide Act No.23/1978 (wrongly mentioned as such though amendment Act came into force by Act No.23/1998). Hence, Tribunal came to a conclusion that applicant would be entitled to grant under Section 77A of Karnataka Land Reforms Act and as such, allowed the appeal, set aside order passed by 11th respondent and also allowed form No.7A filed by late Kalappa and granted said lands to his legal heirs namely, respondents-1 to 10 herein under Section 77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, vide order dated 30.11.2005 Annexure-A. It is this order which is sought for quashing by writ petitioners in the present writ petition.