SHEKHARAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner C. J. Shekharappa filed an application" in form 11 under Section 66 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short the 'Act') declaring the total extent of his holding, the number of members in his family, the nature of the land and other particulars, before the 2nd respondent-land tribunal. The tribunal took up the declaration presented by the petitioner in Case No. 416/74-75 after conducting an enquiry, passed an order on 8-8-1977 as per Annexure-A declaring the holding of the petitioner was in excess by 6 acres and further directing the petitioner to surrender the said 6 acres of land on or before 20 8-1977 failing which the tribunal would select any of the lands declared for the purpose of the surplus land. In pursuance of the said order, the petitioner voluntarily gave an application stating that he would surrender 6 acres of land i e., 2 67 acres comprised sn S.No 733A/1 and 3-33 acres comprised in S.No. 467A/1B of Uttangi and Ittige village respectively The tribunal accepted the surrender and a copy of the same was served upon the Tahsildar, who, as required under Section 73(1) of the Act, published the Notification dated 3 3-1978 in the Karnataka Gazette dated 6-4-1978 containing the particulars of the lands vested in the State Government and deemed to have been surrendered as per the Gazette Notification, the copy of which is at Annexure-B. After the surrender was accepted, the lands surrendered were got surveyed by a surveyor who recorded the statement of the petitioner, the copy of which is at Annexure-C Alter the petitioner surrendered the lands in pursuance of the order passed by the land tribunal and the acceptance of the land surrendered by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent, all of a sudden started proceedings to take an area of 6 acres out of S.N 573B of Ittige village purporting to act in pursuance of the order passed by it on 8-8-1977 as per Annexure-A, on a report submitted by the 3rd respondent which the 2nd respondent appeared to have accepted. The petitioner further learnt that on the basis of the report of the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent made an order dated 6 6-1982 in the very same file in which it had made the order as per Annexure-A ordering to accept 6 acres of land in S.No. 573B of Ittige village and in pursuance if the said order, another Gazette Notification dated 28-6-1982 was got published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 22-7-1982 as required under Section 73(1) of the Act. The petitioner came to know about the later order dated 6-6-1982 passed by the 2nd respondent from the Gazette Notification only about a month back when the village accountant informed the petitioner that respondents 2 and 3 have taken the land neasuring to an extent of 6 acres in S N. 573/B as surplus land and that possession of the said land would be taken shortly. Being purturbed by receipt of the said information about the later developments, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation to the 3rd respondent bringing to his notice the earlier proceedings, a copy of which is at Annexure-D. Thereupon the pe itioner made attempts to secure some records to take further steps hut he was supplied with an endorsement as per Annexure-E dated 23-1-1982 and thereafter the petitioner filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or direction quashing the Notification dated 28-6-1982 issued under Section 73(1) of the Act and also all further proceedings pursuant to the order of the 2nd respondent-tribunal dated 6-6-1982.

(2.) Although the notice of the writ petition was served upon the respondenls, none appeared in the initial stage. The Court directed the Tahsildar end Secretary of the Land Tribunal, Hadagali to be present before the court with the original records and when he ultimately appeared before the court with the records, he sought the assistance of the learned High Court Government Pleader to make his representation and the court made available the services of the learned High Court Government Pleader to assist the court in this case, representing the respondents.

(3.) The original records of the tribunal have been secured through the Secretary and are available for reference.