- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.201482 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: 1(A) LATE BASANNA S/O LATE YELLAPPA DECEASED BY LRS. SRI YELLAPPA S/O LATE LINGANNA @ LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 1(B) SRI MALLAPPA S/O LATE LINGANNA @ LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, BOTH ARE R/AT: KURDI VILLAGE, KURDI HOBLI, TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR – 584 123. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI P.S.MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPT. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, MANVI, TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR – 584 123. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR, MANVI TQ., MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR – 584 123. 4. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, RAICHUR, DIST. RAICHUR – 584 101. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER / DISTRICT LAND APPELLANT AUTHORITY, OFFICE AT D.C. OFFICE, RAICHUR – 584 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, (I) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDERS NO.J¯ïDgï JA. PÉDgï r. PÉDgï r.90/74-75, ¢:31.10.1981 AND ORDER NO.LRM/DEC/KRD/90/74-75, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND C AND ALSO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.01.1987 IN R.A.NO.302/1986 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; (II) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE LAND TRIBUNAL, MANVI TO RE-CONSIDER THE DECLARATION FILED BY THE FATHER OF THE PETITIONERS (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) AND TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE NATURE OF THE LANDS AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioners are assailing the order dated 29.03.1982 at Annexure-C and also the order dated 06.01.1987 at Annexure-E. In terms of order at Annexure-C, the Land Tribunal has held that 17 acres 33 guntas in Sy. No.310 and 02 acres 27 guntas in Sy. No.306 of Kurdi village are to be surrendered to the Government. 3. Certain facts which are noticed from the pleadings are as under: The petitioners’ father Basanna S/o late Yellappa filed an application under Form 11 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. Pursuant to the said application, the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 Land Tribunal has passed the impugned order under Section 67 of Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (Act, 1961) at Annexure-C holding that the aforementioned extent of lands are to be surrendered to the Government. The Land Tribunal has opined that the petitioners have not appeared before it, despite service of notice. 4. The petitioners’ father filed a writ petition in W.P.No.25606/1982 assailing the said order. The said writ petition was disposed of, remitting the writ petition to the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority, in terms of the order dated 06.01.1987 has dismissed the appeal as abated on the premise that the appellant before it namely, Basanna had died and his legal representatives were not substituted. 5. This writ petition is filed by the legal representatives of said Basanna on the promise that the Appellate Authority, which passed the order on 06.01.1987 had no jurisdiction to pass the order, as the Act, 1961 did - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 not provide for an appeal against an order under Section 67 of the said Act. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though the order dated 06.01.1987 says that the appeal is dismissed as abated, as the Appellate Authority had no jurisdiction, the said order is nullity in the eye of law. He would further submit that the present petition is filed by the legal representatives of deceased Basanna challenging the order at Annexure-C, which is the order passed by the Land Tribunal, on the premise that the Land Tribunal has not followed the procedure contemplated under Section 67 of the Act of 1961 before declaring that the lands in question are to be surrendered to the Government. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners would also submit that the petitioners, who are the legal representatives of deceased Basanna were not aware of the proceedings before the Appellate Authority and only after they came to know about the order of dismissal of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 the appeal on the premise that the appeal is abated, the present petition is filed. 8. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the petition has to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches and in addition he would also submit that the Land Tribunal has passed the impugned order at Annexure-C after considering the materials and the declaration submitted by the petitioners’ father and even on merit, the order is in accordance with the provisions of the Act 1961 and there is no scope to interfere with the said order. 9. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 10. The points that arise for consideration in this petition are, i) Whether the petitioners have made out a case to interfere with the order, which is passed in the year 1987 by the Appellate Authority? - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 ii) Whether the petitioners have made out a case to interfere with the order passed by the Land Tribunal, holding that certain extent of lands have to be surrendered to the Government on the premise that the lands are excess? 11. As far is the first contention relating to delay and laches raised by the respondents is concerned, it is to be noticed that when the Land Tribunal passed an order on 29.03.1982, the petitioners’ father filed Writ Petition No.25606/1982. Thus, the said order is questioned without there being any delay on the part of the petitioners’ father. 12. In terms of order dated 22.07.1986, this Court remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority on the premise that the petitioner has to assail the said order before the Appellate Authority. The appeal was dismissed as abated on the premise that the appellant is dead and his legal representatives are not brought on record. Admittedly, the appeal is not decided on merits. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 13. More than anything else, Section 118 of the Act of 1961, which provided for an appeal against such orders was deleted vide Act No.23 of 1977 with effect from 01.03.1974. Thus, there was no scope to file any appeal against the said order. Probably, the remedy for the original petitioner Basanna was to invoke Section 118-A of the Act of 1961, which provided a revision before the Regional Commissioner. However, since this Court directed the appeal to be heard by the Appellate Authority, the matter was placed before the Appellate Authority. It is well settled position of law that, the order of the Court cannot confer jurisdiction on the authority. The jurisdiction has to be conferred by the Statute. Thus, this Court is of the view that though the appeal is said to be dismissed as abated, the said order is one without jurisdiction. 14. It is also noticed that the petitioners have pleaded that they were not aware of the proceedings initiated by their father. The petitioners also claim to be in possession of the property and it is also noticed from the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 record of right that the property records are still in the name of the respondents-State pursuant to the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. Nothing is placed on record to hold that the properties have been distributed to landless persons as per the provisions of the Act of 1961. Considering the fact that there was a challenge to the order, of the Tribunal way back in the year 1982 i.e., soon after the order was passed the said petition was not considered on merits and was erroneously transferred to the Appellate Authority, which had no jurisdiction, this Court is of the view that the petition has to be considered on merits. 15. Coming to the impugned order at Annexure-C passed by the Land Tribunal, it is noticed that the Land Tribunal has observed that the applicant remained absent, despite repeated notice issued to him. Thereafter, the Land Tribunal holds that the Deputy Tahsildar has inspected the land and submitted a report and based on the said report the Land Tribunal has passed the impugned - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 order, directing surrender of lands to the Government. However, on what basis the Deputy Tahsildar has submitted the report is not considered and the Land Tribunal has not applied its mind to the claim made by the petitioners and has not referred to any of the provisions of the Land Reforms Act to hold that the lands are excess lands. How many members are present in the petitioners’ family is also not taken into account to calculate the permissible holding. 16. Under these circumstances, it has to be held that the impugned order at Annexure-C is not a speaking order. Needless to say that the authority i.e., the Land Tribunal is required to pass a speaking order in connection with the declaration under Form 11 of the Act of 1961. On what basis the lands are held to be excess and how many members of the petitioners’ family are taken into consideration while calculating the permissible holding is also required to be spelt out in the order itself. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1518 WP No. 201482 of 2024 17. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 29.03.1982 at Annexure-C passed by the Land Tribunal is set aside. iii) The impugned order dated 06.01.1987 at Annexure-E is held to be one without jurisdiction. iv) The matter is remitted to the jurisdictional Land Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. v) The Land Tribunal to issue notice to the petitioners and all the concerned before passing the order, in the light of the observations made in Paragraphs 13 and 14. vi) It is further made clear that nothing is expressed on the merits of the matter. vii) All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE LG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 39