BYRAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on the question of admission. This petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment dtd. 7/9/2021 passed by this court in W.A.No.4081/2017.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Sec. 77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 was amended with effect from 25/8/2001, which does not prescribe for any limitation and therefore, Rule 26C of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short) which prescribes limits for filing Form 7A to 6 months is contrary to Sec. 77A of the Act. It is further submitted that since, Sec. 77A of the Act has not been considered, the order passed by this court suffers from error apparent on the face of the record. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in 'SRI HARI SHANKAR PAL AND ANOTHER VS. ANANTH NATH MITTER AND OTHERS', 1949 FC 36 and 'ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI', (2006) 12 SCC 583.

(3.) We have considered the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Sec. 77(1) of the Act provides that the Deputy Commissioner may grant land to the applicant subject to such restrictions and conditions and in the manner as may be prescribed. The aforesaid provision does not prescribe any limit for filing the application for submission of Form 7A. However, the aforesaid limitation as prescribed by Rule 26C of the Rules is not in contravention of the provision of Sec. 77A of the Act. In any case, the validity of Rule 26C was not an issue raised in the writ petition. The judgment passed by this court neither suffers from any error apparent on the face of the record nor any jurisdictional infirmity warranting interference of this court in exercise of review jurisdiction. In the result, petition fails and is hereby dismissed.