Y. HALAPPA, S/O. LATE CHANNABASAPPA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, MULTI STOREYED BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001 AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondents 1 to 3. Petitioners claim that the grand father of 5th respondent leased 4 acres of land in Sy. No. 61/B of Ittigudi Bevinahalli village in favour of first petitioner and an extent of 3 acres 79 cents of same village in favour of 2nd petitioner under two lease deeds at Annexures -A and B dated 5 -4 -1973. They have not filed Form No. 7 seeking grant of occupancy rights. However, they have filed Form No. 7A and it is stated that proceedings on the applications of both petitioners are pending in SR Nos. 221/99 -200 and 140/99 -2000. Hence, they are seeking a direction to 3rd respondent to dispose of the same at the earliest.

(2.) ON the other hand, the Land Tribunal by the impugned order at Annexure -H dated 28 -3 -2012, has granted occupancy rights in favour of two L.Rs of late Shetyala Basavarajappa on his Form No. 7 to an extent of 7 acres 79 cents of land in Sy. No. 61/B of the said village. Petitioners are also seeking to quash the said order.

(3.) SO far as the Mandamus sought to direct 3rd respondent to dispose of Form 7A filed by the petitioners is concerned, since the order at Annexure -H is not challenged by the landlords, the same is in force. Such being the case, direction sought to consider Form 7A in respect of very same land does not arise. Form No. 7A produced as Annexures -C and E does not bear the date and seal. Though Annexure -D show that proceedings pertain to the application of first petitioner commenced on 30 -11 -2001, the actual date on which application was filed is not forthcoming. Whether the application was within the stipulated time or not, cannot be gathered. The last date of hearing was on 24 -6 -2003. The petitioners kept quiet from 2003. Be that as it may, all that this Court can observe is that if the applications are filed in time and are in accordance with law, only such applications deserve consideration and not otherwise.