Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 94 (KAR)

H. R. Ravichandra v. State of Karnataka

2024-02-01

R.DEVDAS

body2024
JUDGMENT R.DEVDAS, J. - Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of forfeiture dtd. 9/7/2015 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore Sub-Division, Kandaya Bhavana under the provisions of Sec. 83 for violation of the provisions contained in Ss. 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case where the impugned order of forfeiture has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner without notice to the petitioner. It is further submitted that under similar circumstances, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.7821/2021 has passed an order dtd. 16/8/2021 remanding the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved person. 4. Admittedly, as on the date of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, no proceedings were pending before any Court/authority. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate points out from the impugned order that notice was indeed issued to the petitioner and in spite of notice having been issued, the petitioner did not appear before the Assistant Commissioner. 6. It is the contention of the learned Additional Government Advocate that even as per the materials available on record, after forfeiture, the excess lands have been granted by the State Government to third parties. The Assistant Commissioner is therefore required to ascertain, whether the forfeited lands still remain with the State Government or has been granted to third parties. If the lands have been granted to third party, then subsec. (1) of Sec. 12 of the amending Act will apply to say that the proceedings have reached finality. Or otherwise, sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 12 of the Amending Act will apply and all further proceedings shall be declared as abated by the Assistant Commissioner. 7. Having considered the submission of the learned Counsels and on perusing the judgment of the coordinate Bench in W.P.No.7821/2021, this Court finds that facts and circumstances in both these matters are quite similar and therefore, the benefit of the decision of the coordinate bench should also enure to the petitioner herein. 8. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dtd. 15/9/2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner in L.R.F No.83(AJ)24/2008-09 is hereby quashed and set aside. 8. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dtd. 15/9/2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner in L.R.F No.83(AJ)24/2008-09 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner including the consequences of the subsequent amendment brought to the provisions of Ss. 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment No.56 of 2020. 9. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 1/3/2024, without waiting for further notice from the Assistant Commissioner. Ordered accordingly. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today.