PUTTAVEERAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the land in dispute admeasures 30 guntas out of survey No. 177 situate at kadukothanahalli village in mandya district. The land was granted to respondent 4 in accordance with the Mysore land revenue (Amendment) rules, 1960 by the competent authority. The saguvalli chit was issued in favour of respondent 4 on February 15, 1971. The saguvalli chit contains a condition that the grantee shall not alienate the land for a duration of 15 years from the date of grant. The grantee transferred the land in favour of the appellant by registered document on February 29, 1978. The transfer was within a duration of 15 years from the date of the grant. The appellant is in possession of the land in dispute from the date of transfer.

(2.) the government of Karnataka enacted the Karnataka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') to provide for the prohibition of transfer of certain lands granted by the government to persons belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes in the state. Section 4 of the act inter alia provides that transfer of any granted land made either before or after the commencement of the act in contravention of the terms of grant shall be null and void. Section 5 confers power upon the was submitted that in cases where the grant is for an upset price, then the condition of non-alienability is not permissible under the 1960 rules and consequently, the transfer in favour of the appellant was not hit by the Provisions of Section 4 of the act. The contention urged by the learned counsel does not seem to have been agitated before the deputy commissioner or the learned single judge, but as the contention goes to the root of the matter, it is necessary to ascertain whether there is any merit in the contention and whether the proceedings are required to be remitted back to the assistant commissioner to record a finding. Assistant commissioner to declare the transfer as null and void and resume the land on satisfaction that the transfer was in violation of the condition of the grant. The assistant commissioner is also authorised to regrant the land on resumption to the original grantee or to his legal representatives.

(3.) in exercise of the power conferred under Section 5 of the Act, the assistant commissioner commenced proceedings to determine whether the transfer in favour of the appellant was hit by Provisions of Section 4 of the act. The fact that respondent 4 was a member of the scheduled caste was not in dispute. The only contention raised by the appellant was that the condition of non-alienability for a duration of 15 years could not have been inserted while issuing saguvalli chit in view of the Provisions of Rule 43-g(4) of the Mysore land revenue (Amendment) rules, 1960. The relevant Rule reads as follows: "43-g(4). Where the grant is made free of cost or is made at a price which is less than the full market value, the grant shall be subject to the condition that the land shall not be alienated for a period of 15 years from the date of the grantee taking possession of the land after the grant". The assistant commissioner did not accept the contention and order of resumptions and re-grant was passed in favour of respondent 4. The order was confirmed in appeal by the deputy commissioner and the writ petition filed by the appellant before the learned single judge ended in dismissal by impugned judgment dated September 2, 1992. The contention raised before the learned single judge was that the deputy commissioner disposed of the appeal without giving any proper hearing. The learned judge did not find any merit in the contention. The decision of the learned single judge is under challenge.