CHANDRAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner calling in question the impugned order dated 31.08.2016 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub- Division, Bengaluru District in RRT(2) CR 29/2006-07 (Annexure - A).

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that she has certain rights in Sy.No.20 of Chinnappanahalli Village, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. However, her rights are not reflected in the revenue records. There were multiple round of litigation in respect of the said property which culminated in Writ Appeal Nos.3266- 3268/2010. In the said writ appeal the following order was passed:

(3.) It is the contention of the petitioner that she was an impleading applicant in Writ Appeal Nos.3266- 3268/2010 and there was specific direction by this Hon'ble Court to respondent No.2 to hear the petitioner along with other persons who were party to the writ appeals and also parties in the impleading applications. She made an application to implead herself before Respondent No.2. However, no notice was issued to the petitioner at the time of hearing and she was not heard in the said matter and the impugned order has been passed. She further contends that the impugned order is vague and does not decide anything in respect of whom khatha and other revenue records in respect of the property has to be mutated. It merely delegates the work to the Tahasildar. On the said grounds, petitioner prays that impugned order be set aside.