Case Note & Summary
The matter involved a land dispute under the Bombay Paragana and Kulkarniki Watan (Abolition) Act, 1950. The State of Karnataka appealed by special leave against the order of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court dated June 11, 1990 in Writ Appeal No. 283/1986, which had dismissed the State's appeal and upheld the single judge's direction to grant 201 acres 34 guntas of land in Survey No.87 of Fevadihal village to the respondents. The land was originally unassessed and uncultivable waste land as per Mutation Entry No.313 dated August 50, 1960. The Assistant Commissioner, Dharwad, by order dated June 17, 1964, assigned 109 acres 34 guntas for grazing purposes for village cattle. On April 6, 1964, it was decided to transfer 100 acres to the Forest Department for afforestation, and the Government order dated August 1, 1964 granted actual possession of 100 acres to the Forest Department, entered in Mutation Entry No.413 dated August 1, 1966. The Divisional Commissioner's order dated November 27, 1964 granted 92 acres out of 100 acres to 23 persons for cultivation and remanded the matter for fresh enquiry. On March 4, 1968, the Assistant Commissioner granted 201 acres 34 guntas in the same survey number to the respondents, while setting apart 109 acres 34 guntas for grazing and reserving 100 acres for the Forest Department. The Deputy Commissioner, by suo motu order dated January 24, 1977, cancelled the Assistant Commissioner's order dated March 4, 1968. The respondent filed Writ Petition No.2236/77 in the High Court. The learned single judge by order dated December 4, 1985 partly allowed the writ petition and directed grant of 201 acres 34 guntas to the respondent. The State's appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench, leading to the special leave appeal. The Supreme Court noted that the first respondent had been served and the second respondent was deemed served, but neither appeared. The Court held that the orders granting 100 acres for afforestation and 109.34 guntas for grazing purposes had become final and were not challenged earlier by the Watandar; therefore, they could not be challenged due to reversal of the earlier order by the Deputy Commissioner in exercise of suo motu power. In the writ petition, the respondents could have challenged only the residue of the land which should have been considered. The Court reasoned that the right of the Watan under Section 4 is subject to the rights created in Section 4-A of the Act. Consequently, the Division Bench and the learned single judge had not properly considered the controversy. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court orders and remitted the matter to the High Court to dispose of the writ petition on merits in accordance with law. The part of the order of the learned single judge in favour of the State which became final was confirmed. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Watan Abolition - Rights of Watandar under Section 4 vs Section 4-A - Statutory Right Subject to Other Statutory Creations - Bombay Paragana and Kulkarniki Watan (Abolition) Act, 1950, Sections 4, 4-A - The dispute concerned land in Survey No.87 originally unassessed and uncultivable; earlier orders assigned 109 acres 34 guntas for grazing and transferred 100 acres to Forest Department for afforestation, which became final and were not challenged by the Watandar. The Assistant Commissioner's later order granted 201 acres 34 guntas to respondents, but the Deputy Commissioner suo motu cancelled it. The High Court directed grant of entire 201 acres 34 guntas. The Supreme Court held that the right of the Watan under Section 4 is subject to rights created in Section 4-A, and the final orders for afforestation and grazing could not be challenged in the writ petition; only residue land should have been considered. Held, the High Court did not properly consider the controversy and the matter was remitted for fresh decision on merits in accordance with law. B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope of Challenge to Final Orders - Limits on Suo Motu Revision - Bombay Paragana and Kulkarniki Watan (Abolition) Act, 1950, Sections 4, 4-A - The writ petitioner could not challenge the prior final orders granting land for afforestation and grazing merely because the Deputy Commissioner exercised suo motu power to cancel the subsequent grant; the challenge should be confined to the residue of land. Held, the High Court orders were set aside and the part of the learned single Judge's order in favour of the State which became final stands confirmed.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court could direct grant of entire 201 acres 34 guntas when earlier orders granting 100 acres for afforestation and 109 acres 34 guntas for grazing had become final and were not challenged by the Watandar; and whether the writ petitioner could challenge the final orders merely because Deputy Commissioner exercised suo motu power to cancel subsequent grant.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Orders of High Court set aside. Matter remitted to High Court for disposal of writ petition on merits in accordance with law. Part of learned single Judge's order in favour of State which became final stands confirmed. No costs.
Law Points
- Right of Watan under Section 4 subject to rights under Section 4-A
- final orders for afforestation and grazing cannot be challenged in writ petition
- only residue land can be considered
- High Court orders set aside and matter remitted
