Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 396 (KAR)

M Lokesh Chandra Tak v. State of Karnataka

2012-04-20

H.G.RAMESH

body2012
ORDER Huluvadi G. Ramesh J.—Petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by the order of the Sub-Divisional Commissioner, Doddaballapur Sub-Dvn., Bangalore on 21.3.2009-annexure C. According to the petitioner, he is an agriculturist and also a resident of Bangalore and his family owns agricultural land. The property in Sy.No. 143/1 (Old Sy.No. 143) situate at Kestur Village, Doddaballapur, Bangalore Rural District measures about 1 acre and he has purchased the same on 14.12.2006. Since then, he is in peaceful possession and enjoyment and his name is entered in the RTC in respect of the schedule property, He has also produced annexures B and B1 indicating his name in Form 9 as well as in Column 12 of the RTC. According to him, behind his back and without notice to him, impugned order is passed at annexure C on initiating proceedings under S.79A & B of the Land Reforms Act r/w S. 80 of the Act. 2. Heard the Government Pleader. 3. A perusal of the impugned order at annexure C is nor indicative of service of notice on the petitioner. However, the said order has been passed alleging violation of S. 79A of the Land Reforms Act and: exercising power under Section 83 of the Act, property has been forfeited by the order of the Sub-Divisional Commissioner instructing the Tahsildar to follow the procedure as per S. 77 of the Act. It is to be seen, no such document is available for having served notice on the petitioner and the order has been passed exparte. 4. To enable the petitioner to have due opportunity in view of the contention that he is from agricultural family and his income does not exceed more than Rs. Two lakhs as on the date of purchase or prior thereto from other sources than agriculture, the impugned order -annexure C passed by the Sub-Divisional Com, Doddaballapur is set aside and also the consequential order to make necessary entries in the name of the government and the entry made if any, by the order of the Sub-Divisional Commissioner in the RTC stands quashed. 5. The petitioner to appear before the Sub-Divisional Commissioner, Doddaballapur on or before 11th June, 2012. Thereafter, it is for the authority to pass appropriate orders according to law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. All contention are left open to be urged. 6. Petition is allowed. 5. The petitioner to appear before the Sub-Divisional Commissioner, Doddaballapur on or before 11th June, 2012. Thereafter, it is for the authority to pass appropriate orders according to law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. All contention are left open to be urged. 6. Petition is allowed. Government Pleader to file memo of appearance in four weeks.