KESHAVAPPA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGASUB DIVISION CHITRADURGA
LAWS(KAR)-1998-9-59
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Decided on September 16,1998

KESHAVAPPA Appellant
VERSUS
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGASUB DIVISION, CHITRADURGA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)HEARD the arguments of both sides for final disposal of the petition at the stage of admission itself.
(2.)IT is not in dispute that the Government land measuring 4 acres 33 guntas bearing New Sy. No. 886 (Old Sy. No. 604) of Kasavanahalli village, Chitradurga Taluk, was granted under dharkhast to the late father of respondent 3 ('r3' for short) named Channappa on 28-3-1956 as he was a member belonging to Scheduled Caste. After his death, R3 sold the said land to petitioner on 12-12-1992 under a Registered Sale Deed. Thereafter, he made an application to R1-Assistant Commissioner seeking resumption of the land under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands)Act, 1978 ('the PTCL Act' for short ). R3's said application was taken on rl's file in Case No. SC PTL/cta/124 of 1996-97. After enquiry, R1 passed the impugned order dated 29-7-1997, the copy whereof is produced as Annexure-D, allowing R3's application holding the said sale of the land in petitioner's favour nidi and void as it was alienated by R3 in contravention of sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the PTCL Act. Petitioner was therefore ordered to be evicted from the land for its restoration to r3. On appeal the said order of R1 was confirmed by R2-Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 16-5-1998 at Annexure-E. Both orders of the authorities below at Annexures-D and E are now challenged by the petitioner mainly on the ground that the provisions of the PTCL Act are inapplicable to the transfer of the land in question because petitioner also belongs to Scheduled Caste.
(3.)REITERATING the above ground, the petitioner's Learned Counsel mr. Manjunath, as sailed the legality of both the impugned orders below. Reliance was sought to be placed by him on a recent Single Bench decision of this Court in V. Nanjappa v State of Karnataka and Others, in support of his contention that if the alienee of the granted land is also a member of Scheduled Caste, the transfer of the land is exempt from operation of the provisions of the Act.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.