- 1 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40641
WP No. 26905 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.26905 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
AFSATH BIBI H A
W/O ABDUL SALAM
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
RD
R/AT NO.3 CROSS
ACHANGI, HALASULIGE
SAKALESHPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573127
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SATHISHA D J, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
Digitally signed
by CHAITHRA A DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
Location: HIGH
VIDHANA SOUDHA
COURT OF
BENGALURU -560001
KARNATAKA
2. TAHASILDAR
EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE OFFICE
ADALITHA SOUDHA
SAKALESHPURA
SAKALESHPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573127
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
SAKALESHPURA SUB DIVISION
- 2 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40641
WP No. 26905 of 2024
SAKALESHPURA
SAKALESHPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT-573127
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED NOTICE AT ANNEXURE-E, BEARING NO.LND(KA)
130/2024-25, DATED 04-07-2024, ISSUED BY THE TAHASILDAR R2
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
Learned AGA accepts notice for the respondents No.1
to 3.
2. The petitioner asserts ownership and possession
of a property bearing No.36-504-125B, in Ward No.21,
measuring 174.193125 square meter located in Achangi,
Sakaleshpura. The petitioner claims that this property was
allocated by the Grama Panchayath in favour of the vendor
of the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner has
purchased the property in question under a registered sale
- 3 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40641
WP No. 26905 of 2024
deed dated 17.10.2019. The copy of the registered sale
deed is produced as per Annexure-A. To support this
claim, the petitioner has produced E-Katha as per
Annexure-B, which is presented as evidence of the
allotment. Moreover, the petitioner contends that a house
has been constructed on this land, and that she has been
consistently paying property taxes to the Gram
Panchayath. This is substantiated by the tax paid receipt,
marked as Annexure-D. Additionally, the petitioner asserts
that she has obtained an electricity connection for the
property and has been regularly paying the associated
bills.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of a
show cause notice by Respondent No.2, acting under
Section 192A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.
The petitioner argues that this notice, which appears to be
an eviction order in its final form, was issued without any
prior inquiry. This lack of inquiry is a central point of
- 4 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40641
WP No. 26905 of 2024
contention for the petitioner, who argues that such an
eviction notice is legally unsustainable in its current form.
4. In response, the learned Additional Government
Advocate (AGA) has presented a counter-argument,
drawing the Court’s attention to the fact that the disputed
property is part of what is known as Gomala land. The
AGA contends that the documents upon which the
petitioner is basing her claim of title are not valid, as the
Gram Panchayath does not have jurisdiction over Gomala
land. It is argued that the Gram Panchayath lacks the
authority to divert revenue land for other uses, and any
such allocation or grant made by the Panchayath is
therefore without legal standing and jurisdiction.
5. The petitioner’s counsel has referenced a
previous judgment from this Court, where in a similar
case, it was determined that an eviction notice issued
without prior inquiry was not sustainable. In that instance,
the Court directed that the eviction notice should be
treated as a show cause notice, thereby giving the
- 5 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40641
WP No. 26905 of 2024
petitioner an opportunity to be heard before any final
order was passed.
6. In the present case, the facts appear to be
strikingly similar. The eviction notice issued by Respondent
No.2 also seems to have been issued without conducting a
prior inquiry. The documents submitted by the petitioner
along with the writ petition indicate, at least on a prima
facie basis, that the petitioner’s claim to the property is
rooted in a grant or allotment made by the Gram
Panchayath. The petitioner must be given an opportunity
to prove that the property in question is not part of
Gomala land. Simultaneously, it is incumbent upon
Respondent No.2 to thoroughly verify whether the
disputed property is indeed part of Gomala land. Only after
such a detailed inquiry, in which the petitioner is given a
fair chance to present evidence, should Respondent No.2
proceed to pass any orders. Prima-facie, the impugned
eviction notice, having been issued without an inquiry, is
unsustainable.
- 6 -
NC: 2024:KHC:40641
WP No. 26905 of 2024
7. For the reasons stated above, this Court passes
the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned eviction notice bearing
No.LND(KA):130/2024-25 dated 04.07.2024
passed by respondent No.2 - Tahasildar as
per Annexure-E is hereby quashed.
iii. The petitioner shall appear before
Respondent No.2/Tahasildar on 11.11.2024.
The petitioner is at liberty to submit all
relevant documents in support of her
contention.
iv. Respondent No.2/Tahasildar, after
hearing the petitioner, shall pass appropriate
orders in accordance with the law within an
outer limit of three months from the date of
receipt of the certified copy of this order.
Until such time, Respondent No.2/Tahasildar
shall not take any further action.
SD/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
NBM
List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3