@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
B. Manohar, J.@mdashThe petitioner, in this writ petition, has sought for quashing the order dated 18.01.2013 issued by the Deputy Commissioner and also the communication dated nil/February 2011 issued by the 2nd respondent and also deleting the name of petitioner from the property card in respect of site No. 2. The grievance of the petitioner, in the writ petition, is that Plot No. 2 formed in T.S. No. 332/1 A 2 in Sy. No. 22 Block No. 31 originally belonged to the State Government. In order to provide housing sites to goldsmith community, 108 sites were formed. One of the sites was allotted in favour of B. Abdul Khaleel, son of Abdul Azeez, who was also a goldsmith by profession, by the Tahasildar by order dated 24.11.1985. As per the condition of the allotment letter, the site allotted was not to be alienated for a period of 15 years. After completion of the prohibition period, the wife of Abdul Khaleel sold the property in favour of M. Mahammad Noor and R. Abdul Hadi as per registered sale deed dated 04.09.2010. Subsequently, the petitioner purchased site No. 2 from M. Mahammad Noor as per the registered sale deed dated 12.11.2010. However, on the complaint made by one Mazhar-Ul-Haq and Ashfaq, the Deputy Commissioner called for a report from the Tahsildar with regard to site No. 2. The Tahsildar called for a report from the Revenue Inspector. The Revenue Inspector after conducting the spot inspection submitted a report stating that Plot No. 2 was allotted in favour of Abdul Kahleel as per the allotment letter dated 24.11.1985; after his death, his wife sold the property in favour of M. Mahammad Noor and R. Abdul Hadi, as per the registered sale deed dated 04.09.2010. Subsequently, the petitioner purchased the said site No. 2 from M. Mahammad Noor. The said property is in possession of the petitioner as on today, and there is no violation of conditions of grant. The Tahasildar reported the same to the, Deputy Commissioner as per the communication dated 30.07.2012. The Deputy Commissioner, by its communication dated nil/February 2011 directed the Tahasildar as well as the Assistant Director of Land Records and Sub-Registrar, to evict the persons in possession of Site Nos. 2, 18, 19 and 64 and not to register any documents in respect of those sites, though the petitioner purchased the site on 12.11.2010 itself. On the basis of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, the City Surveyor attached to the Office of the Assistant Director of Land Records removed the name of the petitioner in the property card and entered that plot No. 2 as vacant standing in the name of the State Government in the property column. The petitioner got issued a legal notice to the Deputy Commissioner, Bellary, that he is the absolute owner of the property as per the registered sale deed dated 24.11.1985 and deleting his name in the property card is contrary to law. The Deputy Commissioner without considering the report submitted by the Revenue Inspector, Tahasildar, by his order dated 18.01.2013 issued an endorsement stating that the name of the petitioner cannot be included in the property register. Being aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. The Additional Government Advocate filed statement of objections contending that as per the Government Order dated 08.05.1970 accorded permission for formation of 108 sites exclusively for goldsmiths to provide sites to landless goldsmith. Accordingly, a layout has been formed and as per the direction of the Deputy Commissioner, the Tahsildar has granted sites to the beneficiaries on 09.02.1972. Further, the contention of the respondent is that list of the beneficiaries has been prepared in the year 1970 itself and the Tahsildar allotted 101 sites to the beneficiaries in the year 1972 and 7 sites are vacant and the said sites are not allotted to anybody. However, in the year 2010, the petitioner got the site allotted in the name of Abdul Khaleel and the records have been built up to show that the land was originally granted to B. Abdul Khaleel and subsequently, the petitioner purchased the site from M. Mahammad Noor on 12.10.2010. Since the said vacant sites has not been allotted to any person including the name of the petitioner does not arise. The Deputy Commissioner issued a direction, as per Annexure-G in the year 2011, to the Tahsildar as well as ADLR and registering authority not to register the sites in the name of any person and if any name has been entered, to remove their names without issuing notice, and insert the name of the Government. On the basis of the said direction to the Tahasildar, ADLR and registering authority, name of the petitioner was deleted. Further, on the legal notice issued by the advocate for the petitioner, the impugned endorsement has been issued. There is no infirmity or irregularity in the impugned orders and sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
3. I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders and other relevant records.
4. The case of the petitioner is that Site No. 2 was formed in TS No. 332/1 A 2 in Sy. No. 22. It was originally allotted to one B. Abdul Khaleel, who was a goldsmith. The said site has been formed in order to provide house sites to the goldsmith. While allotting the sites, a condition was imposed that the allotted site shall not be alienated for a period of 15 years. Subsequently, the said B. Abdul Khaleel died and his wife alienated the property in favour of M. Mahammad Noor and R. Abdul Hadi as per registered sale deed dated 04.09.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner purchased the said site from M. Mahammad Noor as per the registered sale deed dated 12.11.2010. The petitioner became the absolute owner. However, on the complaint made by some person, the Deputy Commissioner, issued direction to the Tahasildar, ADLR and registering authorities to the delete the name of the persons shown as occupants of site Nos. 2, 18, 19 and 64 and take steps to evict them without issuing any notice. Further, on the basis of the said direction of the Deputy Commissioner, name of the petitioner has been deleted from property card and name of the government has been inserted. On the legal notice issued by the advocate for the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner issued the endorsement stating that the name of the petitioner cannot be entered on the ground that Site Nos. 2, 18, 19 and 64 have not been allotted to any person and have been kept vacant, site Nos. 106 & 107 have been reserved for park and site No. 108 has been reserved for road and without the permission of the State Government, the land has been granted. The Deputy Commissioner before passing the order called for a report from the Revenue Inspector and Tahasildar. In the report, it has been specifically mentioned that originally the land was granted to B. Abdul Khaleel as per the order dated 24.11.1985 and the said property has been sold in the year 2010. Nowhere, it is stated that no site has been allotted in favour of B. Abdul Khaleel nor any allegation has been made against the petitioner that on the basis of bogus document, the petitioner has purchased the said site. In the order of the Deputy Commissioner also, no allegation has been made with regard to allotment of site in favour of B. Abdul Khaleel. None of the Officers of the Revenue Department made complaint with regard to the allotment of site in favour of Abdul Khaleel on the basis of bogus document. Though the site was allotted in the year 1985, Abdul Khaleel has not taken steps to mutate his name. Subsequently, on the death of Abdul Khaleel, his wife sold the property to M. Mahammad Noor and R. Abdul Hadi. Nowhere, in the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner, ADLR, Tahasildar or Revenue Inspector, allegation has been made with regard to bogus allotment of site in favour of Abdul Khaleel. In the absence of the same, deleting the name of the petitioner from the property card is contrary to law. The Deputy Commissioner without holding any enquiry directed to delete the name of the petitioner. No notice has been given in this regard. The principles of natural justice has not been followed. Hence, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner cannot be sustained. If, Abdul Khaleel had obtained the site on the basis of a bogus document, nothing prevented either the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner or the Tahasildar to take action against the said person. The grant order clearly discloses that the property has been granted to Abdul Khaleel in the year 1985. The said property has been sold in the year 2010 i.e. after 25 years of grant. On the basis of the complaint made by some person, the Deputy Commissioner cannot pass the order and direct deletion of name of the petitioner. Hence, the impugned communications/endorsements issued by the respondents cannot be sustained. Accordingly, I pass the following order:
Writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsements/communications as at Annexure-G, M and Q are hereby quashed. The 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner is directed to reconsider the matter afresh. If Abdul Khaleel has obtained the site on the basis of bogus documents, it is open for the Deputy Commissioner to take action in accordance with law.
