PARAVATHAMMA Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have suffered orders at the hands of Assistant Commissioner as well as the Deputy Commissioner. The sufferance is in view of respondents 3 and 4 making an application under the PTCL Act for resumption and restoration of the land in question. The Assistant Commissioner has accepted the application which has been confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the land was granted in favour of the respondents on 1-8-1963 and the saguvali chit was issued on 24-2-1964. The sale took place on 21-2-1989 and respondents 3 and 4 filed an application on 3-4-1997 for resumption. Indeed, the only argument of Mr. Sanjay Gowda learned coun-sel appearing for the petitioner is that Section 4 (2) of the Act requires to be read down, inasmuch as, from the date of grant, 15 years had already elapsed and the non-alienation clause had rendered itself otiose. Hence, the petitioner having purchased it in the year 1989, the sale is not hit by the Act. He further submits that the sale which has taken place on 21-2-1989 is after 15 years, notwithstanding the fact that under Section 4 (2) of the Act, the petitioners were required to take permission of the State Government for alienation.

(3.) MR. Sanjay Gowda, learned counsel for the petitioner has summarized his contentions as follows :