9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (2) TMI 1141 - SC - Indian LawsWhether the order of the Minister Revenue Government of Karnataka for cancellation of grant made in favour of the Sangha and for transfer of vacant 182 sites from the Sangha to the Inamdars or for payment of compensation in lieu thereof by the Sangha to the Inamdars and the directions in the order dated 22.12.2003 to the BDA to handover the vacant civic amenity sites to the Inamdars free of cost and to acquire the land forming the ring road and pay compensation for such acquisition are to be set aside?
Issues Involved:
1. Delay in filing applications for substitution and impleadment. 2. Validity of the State Government's grant of land to the Sangha. 3. Legal status of the agreement between the Inamdars and the Sangha. 4. Res judicata applicability regarding previous court decisions. 5. Legality of the order directing resumption and restoration of land. 6. The impact of statutory provisions on the grant of land. 7. The effect of the Supreme Court's previous orders on the case. 8. Authority of the State Government to modify or cancel the grant. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Delay in Filing Applications for Substitution and Impleadment: The Supreme Court condoned the delay in filing the applications for substitution and allowed the applications for substitution and impleadment, granting permission to file Special Leave Petitions (SLPs). 2. Validity of the State Government's Grant of Land to the Sangha: The land in question was granted by the State Government to the Sangha for house sites. The High Court found that the land did not vest in the Government on 15.6.1979 because the Inamdars' applications for registration as occupants were pending. Therefore, the State Government had no power to sanction the grant. However, the Supreme Court noted that the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in its judgment dated 15.9.1998 had upheld the State Government's power to grant the land to the Sangha, subject to the Inamdars' entitlement to the price of the land if their claims were upheld. 3. Legal Status of the Agreement Between the Inamdars and the Sangha: The High Court held that the agreement executed by the Inamdars in favor of the Sangha was not legal and void. The Supreme Court noted that the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court had found that the Inamdars had waived their occupancy rights by entering into the agreement and accepting the amounts paid by the Sangha. 4. Res Judicata Applicability Regarding Previous Court Decisions: The High Court concluded that previous decisions did not operate as res judicata. However, the Supreme Court emphasized that the principle of res judicata applies to issues that were or could have been raised in earlier proceedings. The findings of the Division Bench in the judgment dated 15.9.1998 were binding and could not be re-opened. 5. Legality of the Order Directing Resumption and Restoration of Land: The High Court quashed the direction for resumption and restoration of 182 sites to the Inamdars. The Supreme Court held that the Minister, Revenue, Government of Karnataka, could not ignore the findings of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court and cancel the grant made in favor of the Sangha. 6. The Impact of Statutory Provisions on the Grant of Land: The High Court found that the grant was void ab initio due to prohibitions in Sections 79-A, 79-B, and 80 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. The Supreme Court held that these provisions applied only to agricultural lands and that the law permitted the grant of agricultural land for house sites on payment of conversion fine. 7. The Effect of the Supreme Court's Previous Orders on the Case: The Supreme Court's order dated 9.4.1999 in SLP (C) No.2833/1999 did not disturb the findings of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court. The Supreme Court clarified that the order did not contain any statement of law that would amount to a declaration of law under Article 141 of the Constitution. 8. Authority of the State Government to Modify or Cancel the Grant: The Supreme Court concluded that the State Government could not modify or cancel the grant made in favor of the Sangha, as the findings of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in the judgment dated 15.9.1998 were binding. The Minister, Revenue, Government of Karnataka, acted without authority in directing the transfer of vacant sites and civic amenity sites to the Inamdars. Conclusion: The Supreme Court set aside the directions in the order dated 22.12.2003 of the Minister, Revenue, Government of Karnataka, for cancellation of the grant made in favor of the Sangha and for transfer of vacant 182 sites or payment of compensation. The impugned common judgment dated 22.12.2006 of the Karnataka High Court was also set aside, and the writ petitions filed before the Karnataka High Court were allowed. The Civil Appeals were disposed of accordingly.
|
