CHANDRAKALA Vs. TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner of property measuring 1.3 guntas of land in Sy.No.182/2A of Varthur Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk and that she has constructed a building on the said property in accordance with law. That she has not encroached upon any Government property. However, respondent No.1 has issued a notice under Ss. 94 and 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act') alleging that the petitioner has encroached upon Government property and has put up construction. It is submitted that the said notice is issued without jurisdiction. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned notice be set aside.

(2.) The learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 upon instructions submits that such a notice under Sec. 104 of the Act could not have been issued by respondent No.1 - Tahsildar. However, she states that appropriate Authority may be permitted to proceed against the petitioner.

(3.) Sec. 104 of the Act reads as under:-