K.C. PRASHANTH S/O K.N. CHOWDAPPA Vs. SRI AYYAPPA S/O LATE GURUSWAMY, THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the matter has come up for orders on the applications in Misc. W Nos. 1439 and 1440 of 2011 for impleading and for direction respectively, with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the main matter itself is taken up for disposal.

(2.) UTILIZATION of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, only for the purpose of examination of the quality of orders passed by the revenue authorities functioning under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act') and particularly while exercising powers under Section 129 of the Act, in the first instance, by the Tahsildar and later either the Assistant Commissioner acting as fine(sic) appellate authority in terms of Section 136(2) of the Act or the Deputy Commissioner acting as a revisional authority in respect of the original proceedings under section 136(3) of the Act, is nothing short of a criminal misuse of the precious, scarce time of this Court.

(3.) THE present writ petition only depict one such story or picture, but is nevertheless, examined even in the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as it should not be presumed by errant, misbehaving and even corrupt revenue officials, that any order passed by them will be overlooked by the High Court in writ jurisdiction, as the normal rule in such proceedings is non -interference and it is only as an exception, when this Court notices there is something radically wrong in the manner of exercise of power by the revenue authorities and therefore interference is warranted to discipline them or to correct their orders, the matter is given a second look.