ASHA S. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned endorsements dtd. 14/3/2023 at Annexure-E and F, issued by the third respondent-Chief Officer of the Town Municipal Council, Holalkere, wherein the applications filed by the petitioners to register the khatha in their names have been rejected on the ground that the inclusion of the Arehalli Grama Panchayat area and certain other areas into the Municipality area have been challenged in W.P.No.19561/2021 and there have been interim orders passed by this Court.

(2.) However, on hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the respondent-Municipal Council, learned Counsel for the Grama Panchayat and learned Additional Government Advocate and on perusing the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that there would be no harm or prejudice caused if the Municipality were to register the khatha in the name of the petitioners. Even if on a subsequent occasion, the notification issued by the State Government is set aside and the Grama Panchayat area is once again removed from the municipality area, appropriate orders can be passed by the municipality forwarding the records of the concerned authorities. Admittedly, the records which were earlier with the Arehalli Grama Panchayat are now with the third respondent-Municipality. Therefore, at any rate, the fourth respondent-Arehalli Grama Panchayat cannot register the khatha in favour of the petitioners.

(3.) On the other hand, if the applications of the petitioners cannot be considered for some other reasons such as the sites are not carved out of a sanctioned layout in terms of the provisions of Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act and in view of the various circulars issued by the State Government, or any other legally acceptable reason, then appropriate endorsements in that regard may be issued to the petitioners.