- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.104229 OF 2025 (KLR-LG) BETWEEN: 1. DOMBARA HULUGAPPA S/O. LATE MAREPPA, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, R/O. JAYASINGHAPURA VILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583119. 2. H. AYANNA S/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, R/O. JAYASINGHAPURA VILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583119. 3. H. DANAPPA @ DASAPPA S/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, R/O. JAYASINGHAPURA VILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583119. 4. D. HULIGEMMA W/O LATE DOMBARA MAREPPA, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, R/O. JAYASINGHAPURA VILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583119. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH JADAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMPOUND, BALLARI, BALLARI DISTRICT- 583101. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OFFICE, BALLARI, BALLARI-583101. 3. THE TAHSILDAR SANDUR TALUK OFFICE, SANDUR TALUKA, BALLARI DISTRICT-583119. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ORDER 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I. TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION OR ORDER TO SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/ASST. COMMISSIONER, BALLARI IN SUM.CUM.BHOOMI.12/08-09 DATED. 18.06.2008 I.E., VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND REV/APL/144/ 2009-10 ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT/DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BALLARI DATED. 30.12.2020 I.E., VIDE ANNEXURE-H IN SO FAR AS LAND OF THE PETITIONERS. II. ALLOW THE PETITIONS I.E., ANNEXURES-E TO E3 FILED BEFORE HON BLE 1ST RESPONDENT/DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN REV/APL/144/2009-10 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. To issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or direction or Order to set- aside the impugned order passed by the 2nd Respondent/Asst. Commissioner, Ballari in Sum.Cum.Bhoomi.12/08-09 dated. 18.06.2008 i.e., vide Annexure-D and REV/APL/144/2009-10 order of the 1st Respondent/Deputy Commissioner, Ballari dated. 30.12.2020 i.e., vide Annexure-H in so far as land of the Petitioners. ii. Allow the petitions i.e., Annexures-E to E3 filed before Hon9ble 1st Respondent/Deputy Commissioner in REV/APL/144/2009-10. iii. Grant such other suitable relief9s as this Hon9ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioners had applied for grant of lands which were so granted by respondent No.3 in Survey No.44 (P) Jayasinghpur village of Sandur Taluk of Ballari District on 19.07.1994. On 18.06.2008 vide Annexure-D, the said grant was cancelled on the ground that the land was being used for non- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 agricultural mining purposes. The petitioners had filed various revenue appeals in R.A.No.144 of 2009 and other connected matters, which came to be dismissed on 30.12.2020. It is challenging the order dated 18.06.2008 and 30.12.2020 that the petitioners are before this Court seeking for aforesaid reliefs. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were carrying on agricultural activities in the land which had been granted to them in Survey No.44(P), measuring 2 acres. However, certain persons had forcefully occupied the land without the knowledge and consent of the petitioners encroached upon the property and were carrying on mining activity. In regard thereto, the petitioners had filed suits in OS Nos.67, 68, 69 and 70 of 2008 respectively before the learned Civil Judge and JMFC., Sandur. The said suits finally came to be decreed in favour of the petitioners on 24.04.2010. It is on that basis he submits that the illegal occupation of the land - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 of the petitioners cannot be held against the petitioners inasmuch as even before the impugned order dated 18.06.2008 had been passed, suits had been filed by the petitioners on 01.03.2008 seeking for injunction against the persons who had occupied the properties. His further submission is that insofar as the other persons who have been mentioned in the order dated 18.06.2008, the land has been restored to them in Revenue Appeal No.137/08-09 at Annexure-F. But however only the lands of the petitioners have not been restored and the appeals filed by the petitioners has been dismissed. Thus, he submits that both the above orders, which have been impugned in this matter, are required to be set aside. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents-State would, however, submit that the land of the petitioners has been used for non- agriculture purposes. The respondents have rightly cancelled the grant in favour of the petitioners, and no - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 fault can be found therewith. His further submission is that there is an admission on the part of the petitioners themselves that such non-agriculture use of the land of the petitioners have been made. On that ground, he submits that the petition is required to be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents-State. Perused papers. 6. It is not in dispute that there is a grant of land made in favour of the petitioners. It is also not in dispute that the said land has been put to non-agriculture use. But what is required to be considered is who has put the land for non-agriculture use, whether the petitioners have done so or somebody else. 7. A perusal of the plaint in O.S.Nos.67, 68, 69 and 70 of 2008, which were filed on 01.03.2008, indicates that there is a claim made by the petitioners against the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 defendants therein, namely Mr. Sunil Reddy and Mr.Dilip Singh, that they have forcibly occupied the lands of the petitioners and are carrying out mining activities. The said suits came to be decreed in favour of the petitioners, who are the plaintiffs therein, on 24.04.2010. The impugned order was passed on 18.06.2008, after filing of the suits on 01.03.2008, without issuance of any notice to the petitioners and without providing an opportunity to the petitioners of being heard in the matter, though there is a serious allegation made against the petitioners that the land granted to them had been put to non-agricultural use. The aspects of the suit, having been brought to the notice of the Appellate Authority in R.A.No.144 of 2009 and other connected matters, have also not been considered in the final orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner in the said appeals. Except for the said Deputy Commissioner having come to a conclusion that there is an admission made by the petitioners - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 themselves that the land has been put to non- agriculture use. 8. As indicated supra, it is not disputed that the land has been put to non-agricultural use. But if it has been put to such use by some other person other than the petitioners, without the consent of the petitioners, the grant in favour of the petitioners cannot be cancelled on account of such third parties' actions. The suits by the petitioners have been filed on 01.03.2008, even prior to the impugned order dated 18.06.2008, which lends credence to the submission of the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have nothing to do with the use of the land of the petitioners for non- agricultural purposes. In that view of the matter, I pass the following: ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 ii. The impugned order dated 18.06.2008 at Annexure-D, insofar as the petitioners are concerned, the order of respondent No.1/Deputy Commissioner dated 30.12.2020 at Annexure-H are set-aside. iii. The matter is remitted to respondent No.2 for fresh consideration by providing an opportunity to the petitioners to place such document that the petitioners intend to rely upon to establish that the petitioners have not carried on non-agriculture activities by themselves and that at present, in view of the decree that has been passed in favour of the petitioners in O.S.No.67, 68, 69, 70 of 2008, the petitioners continue to be in possession and are carrying on agriculture activities. iv. The petitioners shall submit their objections and documents within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, which shall be considered by - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11652 WP No. 104229 of 2025 respondent No.2 and necessary orders passed, within 8 weeks thereafter. v. The respondents to carryout a physical inspection of the property and ascertain if the land is still being used for non-agricultural purposes, if so, by whom. If persons other than the petitioners are using the land for non-agricultural purposes, the Respondents are directed to take action against such third parties in a time-bound manner. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67