H.K. MUNIRAJU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that he has been in unauthorized cultivation of 1 acre 20 guntas of land in Survey No.30 of Hoodi village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. He made a request for grant of the same in his favour. Respondent no.4/Tahsildar recommended that the land be granted in his favour. However, grant certificate was not issued to him. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed with a prayer to direct the authorities to grant him the land. The petitioner also relies upon a communication issued by respondent no.2/Deputy Commissioner which states that the land is granted to him.

(2.) Per contra, the learned HCGP appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner does not get a right for grant of the land just because the Tahsildar makes a recommendation. In respect of the letter written by the Deputy Commissioner, he submits that there is a typographical error which mentions that the land is granted to the petitioner. He further submits that title passes on to the petitioner only upon a grant certificate being issued and not otherwise.

(3.) Admittedly, the land is not granted in favour of the petitioner. Mere recommendation of the Officer does not confer any right on the petitioner. Occupation and cultivation of the land as contemplated in the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 gives a right to the petitioner to make an application for grant of the land, but not to enforce it as a matter of right when the land is required by the State for other purposes.