Hazrath Sultan Shawar Ali Shah Guruji Vs. State of Karnataka and Others - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
indian penal code, 1860 - section 447 - karnataka land revenue act, 1964 - section 71, section 94-a, section 94-c and section 192-a - petitioner claims to have founded a religious centre and put up construction of a mosque over an extent of 3 acres €“ certain land are cultivated by various persons, while petitioner claims to have taken possession of land during the year 1995 whereafter made a representation to the deputy commissioner, to regularise the said unauthorised possession - petition was filed for a writ of mandamus to direct respondents to regularise petitioner €™s unauthorised possession of the schedule land and to issue saguvali chit and also to consider his representations €“ held that encroachment of gomal land, by the petitioner in the year 1995 was not for the purpose of cultivation of the gomal land but the construction of a gomal to - any other purpose as required by section 71 of the klr act is not ordered - so also section 94-a introduced in the krl act by act no. 2 of 1991 with effect from 20-3-1991, for regularisation of unauthorised occupation of agricultural lands belonging to the state, requires under sub-section (4) for an unauthorised occupant and also make payment of a certain sum of money, for regularisation of such occupation - so also section 94-c provides for grant of land in case of construction of dwelling house in occupied land - petitioner having not made out a legal right for regularisation under either section 94-a or 94-c of the klr act, a writ of mandamus is unavailable - petition dismissed with cost. (para 4, 5) comparative citation: 2015 (5) kantlj 140, 1. petitioner claims to have founded a religious centre and put up construction of a mosque over an extent of 3 acres comprised in sy. no. 55 of bellahali village, yelahanka, bangalore north taluk. according to the petitioner he has a following of more than 15000 devotees of all religious. it is submitted that land in sy. no. 55 measures 103 acres 30 guntas out of which 69 acres 17 guntas are cultivated by various persons, while petitioner claims to have taken possession of land measuring 3 acres during the year 1995 whereafter made a representation dated 27-11-1995 annexure-a to the deputy commissioner, bangalore city to regularise the said unauthorised possession. yet again in 2007 one more representation when made a spot inspection was held, a mahazar drawn along with a sketch annexure-b, c, c1 and d, respectively, following which a borewell was erected, telephone connection obtained, service certificate issued, and a licence issued by the police for a sound system. it is alleged that the authorities instituted criminal proceeding for offences punishable under section 447 of indian penal code, 1860 and section 192-a of the karnataka land revenue act, 1964 (for short, klr act'), in cc no. 1941 of 2007 through the chikkajala police. that proceeding when not preceded by a notice was quashed by order dated 20-11-2009 annexure-j in cri. petition no. 3534 of 2008. further report dated 7-8-2014 annexure-k of the petitioner when not considered, although several other unauthorised occupants of the gomal land have had their names entered in the mutation registers while some having approached this court in w.p nos. 8264 and 8265 of 2013 to regularise their possession, directions are issued to the tahsildar and one such direction is in the order dated 21-2-2013 annexure-p. hence this petition for a writ of mandamus to direct respondents to regularise petitioner's unauthorised possession of the schedule land and to issue saguvali chit and also to consider his representations dated 27-11-1995 and 7-8-2014. 2. petition is not opposed by filing statement of objections. 3. learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates the averments set out in the petition. per contra, learned government advocate submits that petitioner is not in possession of agricultural lands, since it is asserted that building for a mosque is constructed on three acres of agricultural land, illegally. the land in question is not divested by an order of the deputy commissioner under section 71 of the klr act from gomal to any other purpose. in addition, it is submitted that section 94-a of the said act provides for regularisation of unauthorised occupation of agricultural lands by a committee constituted for the said purpose, provided and application in from 50 along with payment of value of the land, is filed within six months from 23-9-1991, the date on which section 94-a was inserted by act no. 2 of 1991. according to the learned counsel mere filing of representation is not sufficient compliance of section 94-a of the klr act. moreover, representation is of the year 1995 on the allegation that petitioner is in possession of the lands from 1995 i.e. after the insertion of section 94-a of the act with effect from 23-9-1991. in addition, it is contended that it is not the case of grant of land for construction of a dwelling house and therefore, section 94-c has no application. 4. in the light of the submissions of the learned government advocate and having regard to admitted facts, there is no more doubt that encroachment of gomal land in sy. no. 55 of bellehalli, by the petitioner in the year 1995 was not for the purpose of cultivation of the gomal land but the construction of a gomal to - any other purpose as required by section 71 of the klr act is not ordered. so also section 94-a introduced in the krl act by act no. 2 of 1991 with effect from 20-3-1991, for regularisation of unauthorised occupation of agricultural lands belonging to the state, requires under sub-section (4) for an unauthorised occupant and also make payment of a certain sum of money, for regularisation of such occupation. so also section 94-c provides for grant of land in case of construction of dwelling house in occupied land. 5. in the circumstances, petitioner having not made out a legal right for regularisation under either section 94-a or 94-c of the klr act, a writ of mandamus is unavailable. petition rejected with cost quantified at rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with the registrar, high court of karnataka and on failure, to execute the order for recovery as an arrears of land revenue.