RATHNAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The captioned writ petition is filed by the grandson of the original grantee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure - E, wherein respondent No.2 - Deputy Commissioner has allowed appeal filed by respondent No.4 and set aside the order dtd. 14/6/2018 passed by respondent No.3 - Assistant Commissioner.

(2.) In the instant case, on examining the Grant Certificate, it is clearly evident that one Oblappa participated in a public auction conducted by the Competent Authority. In public auction, Oblappa purchased the land by depositing the entire amount of Rs.20.00. On depositing of auction price, the Authority has issued a title document under Form No.1.

(3.) The controversy as to whether the document styled as a Certificate of Grant would automatically fall under the category of granted land for depressed classes is dealt by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B.K.Muniraju vs. State of Karnataka,(2008) 4 SCC 451. The Hon'ble Apex Court, while dealing with the said controversy and upholding the judgment of the High Court, held that, merely because a document is styled as a certificate of grant, that in itself will not lead to an inference that the grant was intended for a depressed class. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B.K.Muniraju held as under: