Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35209 (KAR)

HEMAVATHI M S v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/184/2024 · 2025-03-28

N S Sanjay Gowda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13462 WP No. 184 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 184 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: HEMAVATHI M. S. W/O SURESHA M. E. AGED 48, NO.305, LAKVEN HOMES, 3RD MAIN, COCONUT GARDEN, AYYAPPA, K. R.PURAM, VTC KRISHNARAJAPURA, K. R. PURAM PO., BENGALURU - 560 036. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. UMA SHANKAR M. N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY, TO GOVERNEMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND HUMAN RESOURCES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MADDUR TALUK, MADDUR, MADDURU DISTRICT - 571 401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI S., HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R2 - ASSISTANT Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13462 WP No. 184 of 2024 COMMISSIONER, MANDYA SUB-DIVISION, LRF.NO.106/16-17, DTD 31.01.2017 AT ANNEXURE-A AND LRF.NO.106/16-17 DTD 29.09.2020 AT ANNEXURE-B AND AFTER EXAMINING THE SAME QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE ENDORSEMENT DTD 31.01.2017 IN LRF.NO.106/16-17, AT ANNEXURE-A AND IN LRF.NO.106/16-17 DTD 29.09.2020 AT ANNEXURE-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. An order of vesting passed by the Assistant Commissioner for contravention of Section 79A & B of the Land Reforms Act ("the Act", for short) is challenged in this petition. 2. The petitioner has produced the order sheet maintained by the Assistant Commissioner. A perusal of said order sheet would indicate that there was no mention that notice was in fact served on the petitioner. In fact the entire order sheet maintained basically indicates that the proceedings were being adjourned due to unavailability of the Presiding Officer and ultimately, the order was passed stating - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13462 WP No. 184 of 2024 that Sections 79A & B of the Act were contravened which required an order of vesting to be passed. It is therefore clear that the impugned order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. In the normal course, the matter would have to be remanded to the Assistant Commissioner, since Sections 79A & B of the Act were omitted by virtue of an amendment to the Land Reforms Act, no useful purpose would be served by remanding the matter to the Assistant Commissioner and hence, the impugned proceedings initiated shall stand abated. 4. In view of the above, the revenue authorities to restore the name of the petitioner in the revenue record. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1