C. KRISHNAMURTHY Vs. VARADARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide order dtd. 6/9/2021, the respondents were directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a stipulated period. As the direction of this Court is not complied with, the complainant present this contempt petition in this Court.

(2.) In response to the notice issued to the respondent No.1, respondent Noi.1 has filed compliance affidavit of Sri D.N.Varadaraju, presently serving as Tahsildar, Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District. It is stated in the compliance affidavit that pursuant to the order of this Court, certain steps were taken such as; the Taluk Surveyor has prepared a sketch and drawn mahazar in respect of the land in question and submitted report on 22/3/2022. Then the Revenue Inspector has conducted spot inspection and submitted his report on 14/7/2022 to the Tahsildar. In turn the Tahsildar submitted a proposal dtd. 28/7/2022 to the Assistant Commissioner, Madhugiri Sub Division along with all necessary records seeking his approval for taking further steps in the matter. The Assistant Commissioner, Madhugiri Sub Division by communication dtd. 10/8/2022 instructed the Tahsildar to take further steps. This communication was received by the Tahsildar on 23/8/2022. It is then stated that due to unforeseen difficulties such as heavy rain, the Tahsildar was unable to take immediate steps and subsequently on 20/10/2022, notice was issued to the complainant to pay the requisite market value price, phodi charges, conversion charges and other charges so as to make khatha in respect of the land in question. The complainant then credited the charges through challan on 31/10/2022 and vide order dtd. 4/11/2022, the Tahsildar made katha and pahani in respect of the land in question and by taking all necessary steps, entered the name of the complainant in the RTC, copy of the RTC and mutation register are also placed on record collectively marked as Annexures R1 and R2. It is further submitted that though there is some delay in complying the exercise in compliance of the order of this Court, the delay, firstly, was due to procedural difficulties and secondly, was due to natural calamity. It is also stated that for the delay, the Tahsildar tenders unconditional and unqualified apology to this Court.

(3.) Therefore, as the order of this Court is now duly complied with and the Tahsildar has tendered his unconditional and unqualified apology to this Court thereby submitting the reasons for non-compliance, which are found to be justifiable, in our opinion, the grievance raised in the petition for non-compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.16201 of 2021 dtd. 6/9/2021 no more survives.