CHANDURA K PONNAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. Sri. A.S. Ponnanna, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents are heard, and perused the impugned orders whereby the regularization of the petitioner's occupation of the land measuring 4.85 acres in Sy. No.82 of Kuttandi Village, Ponnampet Hobli, Virajpet Taluk (Subject Property), is set aside by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner - the third respondent, and the revisional authority, the Deputy Commissioner -the second respondent, has confirmed such order dismissing the petitioner's revision petition.

(2.) The short question that arises for consideration in this petition is:

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel contends that the petitioner was not served with the notice of the proceedings initiated by the third respondent for cancellation of the regularization: though the third respondent refers to different dates on which the proceedings were listed and records the petitioner's absence, it would be beyond dispute that the petitioner was not served with any notice of the proceedings. The petitioner therefore preferred revision before the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner as contemplated in law specifically contending that the Assistant Commissioner's order is in violation of the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as there was no notice of the proceedings. The Deputy Commissioner has decided the revision petition on merits referring to certain infirmities in the previous proceedings without examining whether the Assistant Commissioner's Order was in due compliance with the principles of natural justice. The petitioner is confronted with the decision on merits with certain infirmities in previous proceedings for the first time in the revision petition, and the consideration thereof by the Deputy Commissioner is not part of the Assistant Commissioner's finding. The learned Senior counsel further contends that the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner is barred by limitation and is without jurisdiction.