Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16722 (KAR)

SRI.H. NAGARAJU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/5663/2024 · 2025-01-23

Sachin Shankar Magadum

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2935 WP No. 5663 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. H. NAGARAJU S/O LATE B. HOMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/O PATHAGANAHALLI CROSS, KOLALA-MAVUTTHURU MAIN ROAD, KOLARA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 140 2. SRI. H. MANJUNATH S/O LATE B. HOMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O PATHAGANAHALLI CROSS, KOLALA-MAVUTTHURU MAIN ROAD, KOLARA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 140 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJESHWARA P.N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2935 WP No. 5663 of 2024 TUMAKURU TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION, MADHUGIRI-572 132. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, NO.213, 2ND FLOOR, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101. 5. THE TAHSILDAR SIRA TALUK SIRA-572 137 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P.RADHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO BRING THE GUNTAS OF 'A' KHARAB LAND AND 5 GUNTAS OF 'B' KHARAB LAND SITUATED IN SY.NO.63/2 OF PATHAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KOLALA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK UNDER 'KIRDA SAGU' AND TO DETERMINE THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 84(2) AND SECTION 122(B) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964, BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.5.23 AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2935 WP No. 5663 of 2024 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking a mandamus against the respondents to bring 4 guntas of 'A' kharab land and 5 guntas of 'B' Kharab land situated in Sy No.63/2 of Pathaganahalli Village, Kolala Hobli, Korategere Taluk under 'Kirda Sagu' and determine assessment under Section 84(2) and Section 122(b) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'Act, 1964'). 2. Facts leading to the case are as under; The respondents have raised objections regarding the petitioner's claim over the 'B' Kharab land measuring 5 guntas, asserting that such lands cannot be converted or assessed as cultivable land under the existing legal framework. However, the petitioner contends that this classification is no longer relevant since the said land consists of Saravu/Sannasanna Korakalu, which, according to the petitioner, indicates that the land has lost its original classification as 'B' Kharab. The petitioner, relying on the State Government's circular dated 16.05.2018, produced as Annexure-E, asserts that such lands, when proven to have lost their non-arable nature, should be treated as arable land. In light of this, the petitioner argues that the entire extent of 4 guntas of 'A' Kharab land and 5 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2935 WP No. 5663 of 2024 guntas of 'B' Kharab land should be brought under cultivation and that the competent authorities should formally recognize this change in classification. 3. Despite the respondents' objections, the petitioner insists that the Deputy Commissioner possesses the necessary discretion to assess and determine the status of 'B' Kharab land. Given that the petitioner's representation has not been considered by the concerned authorities, this Court finds that a prima facie case is made out for the issuance of a writ of mandamus. However, while doing so, it is imperative that the Deputy Commissioner strictly follows the prescribed procedures under Section 84, read with Section 122(b) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The Deputy Commissioner must ensure that any orders passed in this regard are in strict conformity with the applicable legal provisions. Additionally, Rule 21 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, which lays down the specific regulations governing 'B' Kharab lands, must be carefully considered before arriving at any decision. 4. The Court emphasizes that the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, do not envisage the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2935 WP No. 5663 of 2024 blanket conversion of 'B' Kharab land into cultivable land merely on the basis of individual assertions. Therefore, while the Deputy Commissioner is empowered to examine and adjudicate upon the nature of 'A' Kharab land in accordance with the applicable rules, any assessment concerning 'B' Kharab land must be conducted with utmost caution. The Deputy Commissioner must meticulously follow the legal framework governing such lands and ensure that the assessment process remains within the scope of the applicable statutes and rules. 5.In view of the above observations, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the competent authority to consider the petitioner's representation in a lawful manner. Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. The Deputy Commissioner, respondent No. 2, is directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 17.05.2023 in accordance with the relevant legal provisions ii. The Deputy Commissioner shall conduct a thorough examination of the applicable rules - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2935 WP No. 5663 of 2024 governing 'B' Kharab lands, particularly as outlined under Rule 21 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, before arriving at a decision regarding the classification and assessment of the land in question. iii) Additionally, the Deputy Commissioner is directed to assess the applicability of the State Government circular dated 16.05.2018, as referenced in Annexure-E, in relation to the classification of 'B' Kharab land and take an appropriate decision based on the findings. iv) The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE THM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4