A BASAVARAJAPPA Vs. VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT NITTUVALLI VILLAGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an unusual petition placed before this Court for grant of a relief of a direction to implement an alleged order alleged to have been made by the Tahsildar dated 29 -1 -1996 bearing No. RRTCR 147(A)78 -79.

(2.) The facts in brief as mentioned in the writ petition are as under: The petitioner is the owner of the land measuring No. 64/2 measuring 4 acres and 14 guntas situated at Nittuvalli Village, Taluk Davangere. According to the petitioner a competent Civil Court declared him to be the owner of these lands in O.S. No. 83 of 1991 vide order dated 25 -11 -1995. Petitioner seems to have approached the Tahsildar, Davangere in the matter of implementation of the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff. According to him he requested the Tahsildar to enter his name in the concerned record of rights and also in the cultivators column. The further averments are that the Tahsildar in response to the representation made by the petitioner passed an order on 29 -1 -1996 ordering entering of the name of the petitioner in the cultivators and owners column of the concerned revenue records. Copy of the order of Tahsildar is at Annexure -A. It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of an order of Tahsildar the Village Accountant who is subordinate to the officer has failed to comply with the order of the Tahsildar. Hence he has filed this writ petition for a direction to the Village Accountant for implementing the order of the Tahsildar. This Court issued notice to the learned Government Advocate and further passed an order ordering as to why costs should not be imposed for non -compliance of the order by Village Accountant. Thereafter several orders have been passed from time to time by this Court to which I would be referring at a later stage.

(3.) Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court the State entered appearance and filed a detailed counter and in the counter -affidavit respondent stated that no such order (Annexure -A) was passed by the Tahsildar. The order alleged to have been passed by the Tahsildar is bogus. Hence the same cannot be relied upon, is the contention in the counter filed by the Government. They further allege that the said document at Annexure -A is a fabricated one. Subsequently KEB filed an impleading application to implead KEB in the petition. KEB was impleaded as respondent 3. KEB has filed its counter statement, and it has narrated several litigations initiated for and against the petitioner and adverted to all the details in the counter filed by it before this Court. They have also filed Annexure -R2, an endorsement dated 20 -12 -1997 issued by the Tahsildar in respect of the very same matter.