Sri Nanjundappa vs The State of Karnataka, The Land Tribunal, Smt. Kamakshamma Since dead, by her LRs., Sri Krishnappa and Smt. Indiramma

Ajit J. Gunjal

The petitioner makes an application in Form No. 7-A before the competent authority. The competent authority forwards the said application to the Land Tribunal, Anekal. On such, transfer, it is numbered as LRA 7A 356 564/1998-99. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner files two applications seeking permission to further cross examine respondents I and 2 and re-open the case. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed their objections on the very same day. The said applications are dismissed, Hence, this writ petition.

I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal rejecting the applications is hable to be interfered in as much as an opportunity is required to be given to the petitioner-tenant to further cross examine respondents 1 and 2.

There is a serious lacuna in the proceedings itself. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has filed an application in Form No. 7-A u/s 77-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Indeed, if an application is made in Form No. 7-A u/s 77-A of the Act, it is required to be heard by the competent authority i.e., the Assistant Commissioner and not by the Land Tribunal.

Sub Section (1) of Section 77-A of the Act would read as under:

77-A. Grant of land in certain cases- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, if the Deputy Commissioner or the (or any other officer authorised by the State Govarnment in this behalf) is satisfied after holding such enquiry as he deems fit that a person-

(i) was, immediately before the first day of Match, 1974, in actual possession and cultivation of any land not exceeding one unit, which has veated in the State Government u/s 44; and

(ii). being entitled to be registered as an occupant of such land u/s 45 or 49, has failed to apply for registration of occupancy rights in respect of such land under sub-section (1) of Section 48-A within the period specified therein; and

(iii). has continued to be in actusl psossession and cultivation of such land on the date of commencement of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1997.

he may grant the land to such person subject to such restrictions and conditions and in the manner, as may be prescribed.

[provided that the land so granted together with the land already held by such person shall not exceed 2 hectares of ''D'' class of land or its equivalent therein.]

A perusal of the said provision would clearly disclose that Form No. 7-A is required to be adjudicated by the Deputy Commissioner or any other competent authority, Hence, I am of the view that the proceedings before the Land Tribunal are wholly without jurisdiction. Hence, the following order:

Petition is allowed The impugned order is set aside. The applications filed by the petitioner-tenant to further cross examine respondents 1 and 2 and re-open the case are allowed. The matter stands remitted to the Land Tribunal and the Land Tribunal in turn shall transmit the papers to the competent authority u/s 77-A of the Act, If the proceedings are transferred to the competent authority u/s 77-A of the Act, he shall permit the petitioner to further cross examine respondents 1 and 2.

Rule is Issued and made absolute to the estent indicated above.

Sri R. Kumar learned HCGP is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks from today.

The Registry to sent back the records forthwith.