R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE14H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT WRIT APPEAL No.343/2010(KLR-RR-SUR) C/W WRIT APPEAL No.3902/2010(KLR-RR-SUR) IN WA .343/2010: BETWEEN: THE TALUKA PANCHYATH CHAMARAJNAGAR BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER CHAMARAJNAGAR TALUK & DISTRICT ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. ASHOK N NAYAK, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING, B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD BANGALORE12. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHAMARAJNAGAR3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLLEGAL SUB DIVISION KOLLEGAL CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT24. THE TASHILDAR CHAMARAJNAGAR TALUK CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHAMARAJNAGAR SRI C S PURUSHOTHAM SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS5 SMT RUKMINI C P AGED ABOUT68YEARS W/O LATE C S PURUSHOTHAM (SINCE DEAD RESPONDENT NO.8 IS TREATED AS HER LR’s VIDE COURT ORDER
1309.2021) 6. SRI C P SURESH KUMAR AGED ABOUT44YEARS S/O LATE C S PURUSHOTHAM7 SRI C P KARUNAKAR AGED ABOUT42YEARS S/O LATE C S PURUSHOTHAM (RESPONDENT5TO7ALL ARE R/A #6/41, KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHAMARAJNAGAR-571313 8. SRI C P LAKSHMIKANTHA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s (AS PER ORDER
DATED0302.2017) 8(a) SMT. PADMA MAJOR W/O LATE C.P. LAKSHMIKANTHA ‘PADMA NILAYA’ NEAR SEETHA RAMA KALYANA MANTAPA SANJEEVININAGAR, MUDLAPALYA, NAGARBHAVI, BENGALURU-72 (AS PER THE COURT ORDER
DATED139.2021 3 RESPONDENT NO.5 LR OF DECEASED R8) 9. SMT. C.P. DEVI, AGED32YEARS, W/O SRIKANTHA, R/AT #20-6-90, TEACHERS COLONY, HINDUPURU, ANDHRA PRADESH-515202 ALSO AT #6/41, KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET CHAMARAJNAGAR57131 CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT10 SRI S RAMAMURTHY AGED ABOUT74YEARS S/O LATE C V SRINIVASAN R/A501 EWS, DD BLOCK, 1ST STAGE, BANNIMANTAP HUDCO, MYSORE57501 11. SRI DWARAKANATH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s (AS PER ORDER
DATED0901.2019) 11(a) SMT. GEETHA W/O LATE C.S. DWARAKANATH AGED ABOUT62YEARS R/A #77, LIG HOUSE HOUSING BOARD COLONY CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHAMARAJNAGAR-571313 11(b) C.D. HARISH KUMAR S/O LATE C.S. DWARAKANATH MAJOR11c) C.D. NAVEEN KUMAR S/O LATE C.S. DWARAKANATH MAJOR411(d) SMT NANDINI PRIYA W/O SRI RAGHAVENDRA, D/O LATE C.S. DWARAKANATH MAJOR11a) TO (d) ALL ARE R/AT NO.77 LIG HOUSE, HOUSING BOARD COLONY, CHAMARAJANAGAR-571313 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT.
12. SRI C S KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT65YEARS S/O LATE C V SRINIVASAN R/A # 24, MIG, SHARADADEVI NAGAR MYSORE-570022 13. SRI C S CHANDRASHEKAR SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s (AS PER ORDER
DATED1309.2021) 13(a) SMT. RENUKA W/O LATE C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT51YEARS13b) SMT. NAMITHA D/O LATE C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR MAJOR13c) Ms. SHALINI D/O LATE C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR MAJOR13a) TO (c) ALL ARE RESIDING AT SRINIVASA NILAYA, KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT, CHAMARAJANAGAR-571313.
14. SRI C S VENKATESHWARA AGED ABOUT60YEARS S/O LATE C V SRINIVASAN5R/A # 28/3, 3RD CROSS SREERAMPUR BANGALORE56002 15. SMT SHARADAMMA (ALSO AN HEIR OF C S PURUSHOTHAM) AGED ABOUT86YEARS W/O LATE C V. SRINIVASAN KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHAMARAJNAGAR-571313 (SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HER LR’s RESPONDENT No.5 TO7 RESPONDENT7TO14 AND RESPONDENT No.16 TO19 VIDE ORDER
DATED1309.2021) 16. SMT GAYATHRI AGED ABOUT72YEARS W/O LATE P SUBBAIAH R/A465 7TH C MAIN KALYANA NAGARA HRBR LAYOUT BANGALORE-560028 17. SMT PADMA W/O LATE H.A. SESHAGIRI AGED ABOUT68YEARS RESIDING AT37 LIG HOUSE HOUSING BOARD COLONY CHAMARAJNAGAR-571313 CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT.
18. SMT SUDHA AGED ABOUT66YEARS W/O LATE D PURUSHOTHAM R/A # 1, EWS AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI, II STAGE BASAVESHWARA NAGAR BANGALORE56007 19. SMT VEDAVALLI AGED ABOUT64YEARS6W/O H A JANARDHAN R/A # 165, A19H MAIN ROAD4H CROSS, II STAGE VIJAYANAGAR MYSORE57001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHADESHWARAN C.N., AGA FOR R1-R4 VIDE ORDER
DATED91.2019, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R8(a) IS HELD SUFFICIENT; SRI.G.R. ANANTHARAM, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS56,7,9, 10, 11(a)-11(d), 12, 13(a)-13(c), 14, 16-19; VIDE COURT ORDER
DATED1309.2021, R5 TO79 TO14AND16TO19ARE TREATED AS LR’s OF DECEASED R15) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S4OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.16438/2007 DATED2602/2009. IN WA .3902/2010: BETWEEN:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT, CHAMARAJNAGAR.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLLEGAL SUB DIVISION, CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT.
4. THE TAHSILDAR7CHAMARAJNAGAR TALUK, CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT, CHAMARAJNAGAR. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MAHADESHWARAN C.N., AGA) AND:
1. C S PURUSHOTHAM SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS (a) SMT.RUKMINI C.P. 50 YEARS W/O LATE.C.S.PURUSHOTHAM (b) SRI C P SURESH KUMAR33YEARS S/O LATE.C.S.PURUSHOTHAM (c) SRI C P KARUNAKAR30YEARS S/O LATE.C.S.PURUSHOTHAM1a) TO (c) ARE ALL RESIDING AT NO.6/41,KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571313. (d) SRI C P LAKSHMIKANTHA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s 1(a) WHO IS ALREADY ON RECORD AND1f) SMT. PADMA (e) SMT C P DEVI26YEARS W/O SRIKANTHA R/AT.20-6-90, TEACHERS COLONY,HINDUPUR, ANDHRA PRADESH-515202. 8 1(e) ALSO AT NO.6/41, KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET, CHANARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-13. (f) SMT. PADMA W/O C.P. LAKSHMIKANTHA MAJOR ‘PADMA NILAYA’ NEAR SEETHARAMA KALYANA MANTAPA SANJEEVININAGARA MUDALAPALYA, NAGARABHAVI BANGALORE-560072.
2. SRI S RAMAMURTHY60YEARS S/O LATE.C V SRINIVASAN R/AT.501,EWS,D.D.BLOCK, HUDCO,MYSORE-570015.
3. SRI DWARAKANATH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s (a) SMT. GEETHA MAJOR W/O LATE SRI. DWARAKANATH (b) SRI. C.D. HARISHKUMAR MAJOR, S/O LATE SRI.DWARAKANATH (c) SRI.C.D. NAVEEN KUMAR MAJOR, S/O LATE SRI.DWARAKANATH (d) SMT. NANDINI PRIYA MAJOR, D/O LATE SRI. DWARAKANATH RESPONDENTS3a) TO (d) ARE RESIDING AT NO.77, LIG HOUSE, HOUSING BOARD COLONY, 9 CHAMARAJANAGAR-571313.
4. SRI C S KRISHNAMURTHY52YEARS S/O LATE.C.V.SRINIVASAN R/AT.NO.24,MIG, SHARADADEVI NAGAR, MYSORE-570022.
5. SRI C S CHANDRASHEKAR SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s (a) SMT. RENUKA MAJOR, W/O LATE C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR (b) Ms. NAMITHA MAJOR, D/O LATE C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR (c) SRI.C.P. KARUNAKAR MAJOR S/O LATE C.S. CHANDRASHEKAR RESPONDENTS5a) TO (c) ARE R/AT.6/41, KALAMMA TEMPLE STREET, CHAMARAJANAGAR-571313 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT.
6. SRI C S VENKATESHWARA45YEARS S/O LATE.C.V.SRINIVASAN R/AT.28/3, 3RD CROSS, SREERAMPURA, BENGALURU-21.
7. SMT SHARADAMMA SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’s RESPONDENTS1a) TO (c) 2 TO6AND8TO11WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS LEGAL HEIRS108. SMT GAYATHRI58YEARS W/O LATE.P.SUBBAIAH R/AT.465,7TH 'C' MAIN, KALYANA NAGAR, H.R.B.R.LAYOUT, BENGALURU.
9. SMT PADMA37YEARS W/O H.A. SHESHAGIRI R/AT.37,LIG HOUSE, HOUSING BOARD COLONY, CHAMARAJANAGAR-571313 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT.
10. SMT SUDHA54YEARS W/O LATE D PURUSHOTHAM R/AT.1 EWS AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI2D STAGE,BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, BANGALORE-560079.
11. SMT VEDAVALLI50YEARS W/O H.A.JANARDHAN R/AT.165,'A' 19TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE, VIJAYANAGAR, MYSORE-570017. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.R. ANANTHARAM, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a), R1(b), R1(c), R1(d), R1(e), R2, R3(a-d), R4, R5(a-c), R6 TO R11 VIDE ORDER
DATED0912.15, TREATING NOS. R1(a) TO (c), R2 TO R6, R8 & R11 AS LR’s OF DECEASED R7. THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S4OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE11ORDER
PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.16438/2007(KLR-RR/SUR) DATED2602/2009. THESE WRIT APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING/PHYSICAL HEARING AND RESERVED ON2109.2021, COMING ON THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING/PHYSICAL HEARING FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT
THIS DAY, KRISHNA BHAT J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT
The short question that arises for consideration before us in these appeals is whether the power under Section 25 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, the 'Act') is available to be exercised by the Deputy Commissioner when there is no enquiry/revenue proceedings pending before him for adjudication and whether after an Order has been passed in a revision petition under Section 136(3) of the Act, can he exercise power under Section 25 of the Act for annulling such an Order?.
2. These intra-court appeals are filed by the State of Karnataka and the Taluk Panchayat, Chamarajanagara, calling in question, the Order dated 26.02.2009 passed in W.P. No.16438/2007 (KLR-RR/SUR) by an Hon'ble Single 12 Judge of this Court allowing the writ petition and directing the appellants herein to make entries of the names of respondents/petitioners in the writ petition, in the record of rights by way of inheritance khata in respect of lands bearing Sy.No.458 measuring 3 acres 35 guntas and Sy.No.459 measuring 3 acres 15 guntas in Chamarajanagara, Kasaba Hobli, Chamarajanagara Taluk.
3. The facts in so far as the same are necessary for deciding these appeals are concerned lie in a short compass. There is no dispute about the fact that one Sri. C.V. Srinivasan, father of Sri. C.S. Purushotham (one of the petitioners in W.P. No.16438/2007) was the original owner of the two items of lands in dispute in these proceedings, namely, 3 acres and 35 guntas in Sy. No.458 and 3 acres and 15 guntas in Sy.No.459 of Chamarajanagara, Kasaba Hobli, Chamarajanagara Taluk, having purchased them from one Sri K.T. Somaiah by a registered sale deed dated 24.08.1949 who in turn had earlier purchased them from one Sri A.E.Morris on 14.07.1947. There is also no dispute about the fact that after late C.V. Srinivasan purchased the land, RTC entries 13 were made in his name on 12.03.1964 as per proceedings in MR38864-65 dated 12.03.1964. On finding out subsequently that name of late C.V. Srinivasan was abruptly deleted by the Revenue Authorities and the name of vendor of Srinivasan’s vendor Sri A.E. Morris was re- entered in the revenue records, now deceased C.V. Purushotham and others initiated proceedings for getting their names re-entered in the revenue records (RTC) by way of inheritance khata.
4. It is not necessary to refer in great detail to the tortuous course taken by the revenue proceedings and suffice it to state that by an Order dated 22.11.2006, the Deputy Commissioner, Chamarajanagara District, sitting as a Revenue Court, passed an Order in R.A. No.10/2006-07 (Annexure-A to the writ petition), which is to the following effect: “DzÉñÀ j«d£ï CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÄgÀ¸ÀÌj¹zÉ. PÉƼÉîÃUÁ® G¥À«¨sÁUÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼À ¥Àæ²ßvÀ DzÉñÀ ¸ÀA.DgïJ:122:04-05 ¢.27.02.2006 C£ÀÄß gÀzÀÄÝ ¥Àr¹zÉ. DzÉñÀ ¸ÀA.JADgï:388:64-65 ¢:12.03.1964gÀ°è SÁvÉ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä DzÉò¹gÀĪÀAvÉ Dgï.n.¹.UÀ¼À°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¸À®Ä ¤zÉÃð²¹zÉ. ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀªÁVgÀĪÀ d«ÄäUÉ ¤AiÀĪÀÄzÀ jÃvÁå 14 ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖ E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀĪÀ»¸À®Ä ¸ÀºÁ ¸ÀÆa¹zÉ.
5. The above Order shows that learned Deputy Commissioner, sitting as a Revenue Court, in exercise of power under Section 136(3) of the Act has found that removal of name of late C.V. Srinivasan from the revenue records was illegal, unauthorised and in violation of law and therefore he had ordered restoration of the names of the petitioners before him in the revenue records in respect of two items of lands as per the earlier Order dated 12.03.1964 and further directed his subordinate officials to put up the file for initiating acquisition proceedings obviously on account of the fact that various Government Offices had come up in the two items of lands in violation of the proprietary rights of the petitioners before him over the said lands.
6. Subsequently, a successor Deputy Commissioner to the one who had passed the Order dated 22.11.2006 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) purporting to exercise power under Section 25 of the Act passed another Order dated 20.06.2007 annulling the Order dated 15 22.11.2006 proceeding to reject the revision petition filed by the writ petitioners in R.A.No.10/2006-07. It is the latter Order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 20.06.2007 that was called in question before the Hon’ble Single Judge in W.P.No.16438/2007 and by the impugned Order dated 26.02.2009, writ petition came to be allowed and Order dated 20.06.2007 (Annexure-B) was quashed with directions as indicated above.
7. There is no dispute about the fact that the Order dated 22.11.2006 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) came to be passed allowing the revision application filed under Section 136(3) of the Act by the writ petitioners before the Deputy Commissioner. None of the appellants herein had chosen to challenge the said order before the competent Authority / Court. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, the said Order (Annexure-A) had become final. However, in purported exercise of the power under Section 25 of the Act, learned Deputy Commissioner (Sri K. Vishwanatha Reddy, IAS) took up R.A. No.10/2006-07, over which he had become functus officio and issued notice 16 to the parties and thereafter passed the Order, the relevant portion of which reads as follows: “DzÀgÉ F £ÁåAiÀÄ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¨sÀÆPÀAzÁAiÀÄ C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ 1961gÀ «¢ü 25gÀ jÃvÁå PÀAzÁAiÀiÁ¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ «±ÉõÀªÁV zÀvÀÛªÁVgÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀ ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¹ ¥ÀÄ£Àgï«ZÁgÀuÉUÉ vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆArgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¨sÀÆPÀAzÁAiÀÄ C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ «¢ü 25gÀ jÃvÁå PÀAzÁAiÀiÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ vÀªÀÄä £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÄ£Àgï ¥Àj²Ã°¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±À«gÀĪÀÅ¢®èªÉA§ §UÉÎ WÀ£À GZÀÑ£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀĪÀÅ ºÉÆgÀr¹gÀĪÀ DzÉñÀzÀ ¥ÀæwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. CªÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ DzÉñÀUÀ¼À°è£À «zÁåªÀiÁ£ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ F £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ «zÁåªÀiÁ£ÀªÀÅ ¨ÉÃgÉ ¨ÉÃgÉAiÀiÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀj DzÉñÀUÀ¼ÀÄ F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtPÉÌ C£Àé¬Ä¸ÀĪÀÅ¢®èªÉAzÀÄ ¥ÀjUÀt¹zÉ. j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀ ªÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ 1963gÀ°è vÀªÀÄä d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ¥Àr¹PÉÆArzÀÝ §UÉÎ zÁR¯É ºÁdgï¥Àr¹ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀªÁVgÀĪÀ d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß ©lÄÖ vÁªÀÅ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀªÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀPÉÌ ¥ÀjºÁgÀªÀ£ÁßzÀgÀÆ PÉÆr¹PÉÆqÀ¨ÉÃPÉA§ÄzÁVzÀÄÝ, j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ºÁdgï ¥Àr¸À¯ÁzÀ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ zÁR¯ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV, ¸ÀzÀj zÁR¯ÉAiÀÄÄ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ PÁAiÉÄÝ «¢ü 6gÀ jÃvÁå ºÉÆgÀr¸À¯ÁzÀ C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉAiÀiÁVzÀÄÝ CzÀgÀ°è j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀjUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀÝ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA§gï 444/2gÀ°è£À 1.12 JPÀgÉ d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄĤì¥À¯ï ºÉʸÀÆ̯ï PÀlÖqÀPÁÌV ¨ÉÃPÁVzÉ JAzÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå : Dgïr:ºÉZï:130:J¯ïDgïE:60 ¢£ÁAPÀ:29.11.1962gÀ°è WÉÆö¹gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀ ¥ÀÆ«ðPÀgÀÄ «ªÁzÀ¸ÀàzÀ d«ÄãÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:24-8-1949gÀAzÀÄ PÀæAiÀÄPÉÌ ¥ÀqÉ¢zÀÄÝ, PÀæAiÀÄPÉÌ ¥ÀqÉzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸ÀzÀj d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß ¸Áé¢üãÀ ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÁzÀ PÀAzÁAiÀÄ gÀ²Ã¢ EvÁå¢ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÁªÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß ºÁdgï¥Àr¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. C®èzÉ SÁvÉ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀ ¥ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. EªÀgÀ E¤ßvÀgÀ JgÀqÀÄ ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA§gïUÀ¼ÀÄ ¨sÀƸÁé¢üãÀ ¥Àr¹zÀÄÝ EvÀgÉ d«ÄãÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸Áé¢üãÀ ¥Àr¹PÉÆAr®èªÉA§ÄzÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀgÉ F ¸ÀªÉð £ÀA§gïUÀ¼À°è ¸ÀPÁðj ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼ÀÄ 40-50 ªÀµÀðUÀ½AzÀ®Æ PÀbÉÃj PÀlÖqÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀnÖPÉÆAqÀÄ ¸Áé¢üãÀ ºÉÆA¢zÀÄÝ, F jÃw ¸Áé¢üãÀ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß ¨sÀƪÀiÁ°ÃPÀgÀÄ ¥Àæ²ß¸ÀzÉ EgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß UÀªÀĤ¹zÀÝ°è F d«ÄãÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß EªÀgÀ ¥ÀÆ«ðPÀgÀÄ »AzÉ 17 gÁeÁ½éPÉAiÀÄ PÁ®zÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðgÀPÉÌ ¸Áé¢üãÀ ¤ÃrgÀ§ºÀÄzÉAzÀÄ ¸ÀàµÀÖ ¥ÀqÀÄvÀÛzÉ. j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ F d«ÄãÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸Áé¢üãÀ ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ ªÀåªÀ¸ÁAiÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀzÉ EgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ, PÀAzÁAiÀÄ ¥ÁªÀw¸ÀzÉà EgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ, PÀlÖqÀ£ÀÄß PÀnÖPÉƼÀî®Ä CrØ¥Àr¸ÀzÉà EgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ, ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä Cfð ¸À°è¸ÀzÉà EgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ. 50 ªÀµÀð PÀ¼ÉzÀgÀÆ vÀªÀÄä ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ SÁvÉ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁrPÉÆqÀ®Ä PÉÆÃgÀz EgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ, F CA±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ EzÀPÉÌ ¥ÀÄ¶Ö ¤ÃqÀÄvÀÛzÉ. MAzÀÄ SÁ¸ÀV ¸ÀévÀÛ£ÀÄß C«gÀvÀªÁV12ªÀµÀðUÀ¼ÀÄ C£ÀĨsÀ«¹PÉÆAqÀÄ §AzÀ°è ¥ÀæwPÀÆ® ¸Áé¢üãÀ¢AzÁV ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀéwÛUÉ ¸Áé¢üãÀzÁgÀgÉà ªÀiÁ°ÃPÀgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. EAvÀºÀ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj PÀbÉÃjUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀnÖPÉÆAqÀÄ C«gÀvÀªÁV50ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À ºÉZÀÄÑPÁ® ¸Áé¢üãÀ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj PÀbÉÃjUÀ¼À ºÉ¸Àj£À°è ¥ÀÄgÀ¸À¨sÉ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À°è SÁvÉ ¸ÀºÀ £ÉÆAzÀtÂAiÀiÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. EzÀjAzÀ j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀjUÉ «ªÁzÀ¸ÀàzÀ d«Ää£À ªÉÄÃ¯É AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ºÀPÀÄÌ »vÁ¸ÀQÛUÀ½®èªÉA§ÄzÀÄ ¸ÀéµÀÖ¥ÀqÀÄvÀÛzÉ. MAzÀÄ ªÉÃ¼É EzÀÝgÀÆ ¸ÀºÀ 50 ªÀµÀðUÀ½UÉ ºÉZÀÄÑPÁ® C«gÀvÀªÁV ¸Áé¢üãÀ ºÉÆA¢ PÀlÖqÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀnÖPÉÆAqÀÄ, PÀbÉÃj £ÀqɸÀÄvÁÛ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà CqÉ vÀqÉ E®èzÉ ¸Áé¢üãÀ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀÅzÀPÉÌ ¸Áé¢üãÀzÁgÀjUÉ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀéwÛ£À ªÉÄÃ¯É ¥ÀæwPÀÆ® ¸Áé¢üãÀzÀ ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ ºÀPÀÄÌ ¥Áæ¥ÀÛªÁUÀÄvÀÛzÉ. j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀévÀÛ£ÀÄß vÁªÁUÀ°, vÀªÀÄä ¥ÀÆ«ðPÀgÁUÀ° ¸Áé¢üãÀ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀÅzÀPÉÌ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÁUÀ° PÀAzÁAiÀÄ ¥ÁªÀw¹zÀÄzÀPÉÌ gÀ²Ã¢AiÀÄ£ÁßUÀ° ºÁdgï¥Àr¹®è. 50 ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À ªÀgÉV ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀéwÛ£À ªÉÄÃ¯É vÀªÀÄUÉ ºÀPÀÄÌ EzÀÄÝ, vÀªÀÄUÉ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀévÀÛ£ÀÄß ¸Áé¢üãÀ ¥Àr¹PÉÆArgÀĪÀÅzÀPÉÌ ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉA§ÄzÀPÉÌ Cfð ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅzÁUÀ°, CxÀªÁ vÀªÀÄä ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ SÁvÉ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä DzÉñÀªÁVzÀÄÝ, vÀªÀÄä ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ SÁvÉ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉ DVgÀĪÀÅ¢®è CzÀ£ÀÄß §zÀ¯Á¬Ä¹PÉÆqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉÆÃj ¸À°è¹zÀÝ Cfð ¥ÀæwUÀ¼À£ÁßUÀ° ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. CxÀªÁ ¹«¯ï £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è vÀªÀÄä d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß CPÀæªÀĪÁV ¥ÀæªÉò¹ PÀlÖqÀ ¤ªÀiÁðt ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß vÀ¦à¹ ¥Àæw§AzÀPÁeÉÕ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ ªÀÄ£À«¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è, ºÁUÀÆ vÀªÀÄä d«Ää£À°è CPÀæªÀÄ PÀlÖqÀ ¤«Äð¹ vÀªÀÄUÉ £ÀµÀÖ GAlÄ ªÀiÁrzÀÄÝ F £ÀµÀÖ ¨sÀwð ªÀiÁrPÉÆqÀ®Ä DzÉñÀ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ªÀÄ£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀ ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. F J¯Áè CA±ÀUÀ½AzÀ j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ CªÀgÀ ¥ÀÆ«ðPÀjUÉ «ªÁzÀ¸ÀÖzÀ d«Ää£À ªÉÄÃ¯É AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ºÀPÀÄÌ »vÁ¸ÀQÛUÀ¼ÀÄ E®èªÉA§ÄzÀÄ, MAzÀÄ ªÉÃ¼É EzÀÝgÀÆ ¸ÀºÀ CzÀ£ÀÄß j«d£ï CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ PÀ¼ÉzÀÄ 18 PÉÆArgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ¸ÀàµÀÖ ¥ÀqÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F J¯Áè CA±ÀU¼À£ÀÄß UÀt£ÉUÉ vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀ DzÉñÀ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ. DzÉñÀ F £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå:DgïJ:10:2006-07 ¢£ÁAPÀ:22-11-2006 gÀ°è ºÉÆgÀr¸À¯ÁzÀ DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÄ£Àgï ¥Àj²Ã°¹, F j«d£ï CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÄgÀ¸ÀÌj¹zÉ JA§ÄzÀ£ÀÄß gÀzÀÄÝ ¥Àr¹zÉ. ªÉÄÃ¯É w½¸À¯ÁzÀ j«d£ï CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß wgÀ¸ÀÌj¹zÉ.” By the above Order he has set at naught the earlier Order of his predecessor dated 22.11.2006 and he has restored the Order of the Assistant Commissioner, Kollegal dated 27.02.2006.
8. The question, therefore, now is, whether in exercise of the power under Section 25 of the Act, learned Deputy Commissioner could have reviewed the earlier Order of his predecessor referred to hereinabove.
9. For adjudicating the above question it is necessary to make a reference to Section 24 and 25 of the Act: “24. Revenue Officers to be Revenue Courts. – A Revenue Officer, not below the rank of a Tahasildar while exercising power under this Act, or any other law for the time being in force, to inquire into or to decide any question arising, for determination between the State Government and any 19 person or between parties to any proceedings, shall be a Revenue Court.
25. Saving of inherent powers of a Revenue Court.- Nothing in this Act, shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Revenue Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of the process of the Revenue Court.
10. The conjoint reading of the above makes it abundantly clear that the power under Section 25 of the Act is available to be exercised only by the ‘Revenue Court’ and not by individual Revenue Officers. It is true that Revenue Courts are constituted by Revenue Officers not below the rank of a Tahsildar which means and includes the Deputy Commissioner as well. However it is also clear from the above that a Revenue Officer not below the rank of a Tahsildar can constitute a Revenue Court only under the following circumstances: (i) The Revenue Officer in question not below the rank of a Tahsildar should be exercising power under the Act or any other law for the time being in force; 20 (ii) Such power as he is exercising must be for the purpose of inquiring into or to decide any question arising in any proceedings; (iii) Exercising such power must be for the determination of any question between the State Government and any person or between parties to any proceedings.
11. It is only when all the above ingredients are satisfied can the Revenue Officer constitute himself as a ‘Revenue Court’. In other words, merely because a Revenue Officer holds an Office not inferior in rank to that of a Tahsildar, he cannot constitute himself as a Revenue Court. It is therefore axiomatic that under Section 25 of the Act, inherent powers in the purported exercise of which the impugned Order (Annexure-B) has been passed could not have been passed by the Deputy Commissioner as there was no proceeding pending before him for inquiry and therefore, he could not, in law, be a ‘Revenue Court’. Having passed the earlier Order dated 22.11.2006 vide Annexure-A, he had become functus officio in relation to the proceedings in RA102006-07. By placing reliance on a 21 decision reported in ILR1981KAR1309(SIDDESHWAR YUVAK MANDAL BY ITS CHAIRMAN vs. STATE AND ANOTHER), an Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court in MALAPRABHA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in ILR1990KAR1730 has observed as follows:
"13. It follows therefore that where a Revenue Officer not below the rank of a Tahsildar enquires into a dispute or adjudicates any right between the State Government and parties, he becomes a Revenue Court; while so functioning as Revenue Court, he can exercise inherent powers as contemplated under Section 25. If no proceedings are pending under Section 24 before the Revenue Officer, he does not become a Revenue Court to exercise inherent power under Section 25. Section 25 is similar to Section 151 C.P.C. which is available to the Courts. Every Revenue Officer per se is not entitled to exercise the power under Section 25 unless he functions, as a Revenue Court in respect of any proceeding. In the instant case, the Deputy Commissioner did not have any proceeding before him regarding which he was holding enquiry as contemplated under Section 24. Therefore it is obvious that he could not have invoked the inherent powers given to the (Revenue Court. Section 25 has no independent existence (available to Revenue Officer to invoke it as and when he likes. In this context, learned single Judge of this Court in SIDDESHWAR YUVAK MANDAL v. STATE) OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., has observed that Section 25 of the Land Revenue Act is in pari-materia with Section 151 of the C.P.C. and the power of that Section cannot be used to assume jurisdiction which the Court does not otherwise possess. 22 Therefore the impugned order cannot be sustained under Section 25 of the Land Revenue Act."
We respectfully agree with the above interpretation of the power under Section 25 of the Act.
12. In that view of the matter, there is absolutely no error or illegality in the impugned Order passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge and accordingly there is no merit in these appeals and they are liable to be dismissed. Hence we pass the following: ORDER
The Writ Appeal No.343/2010 along with connected case namely, Writ Appeal No.3902/2010 are devoid of merits and accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed. No Costs. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE sac*