LAKSHMAMMA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court laying a challenge to the Deputy Commissioner's order dtd. 20/6/2013, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-L, the operative portion of the said order reads as under: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_766_LAWS(KAR)11_2022_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners argues that this order proceeds on a concession allegedly made by his counterpart before the Deputy Commissioner, when the proceedings were pending, to the effect that possession of the stakeholders should be ascertained by the surveying authority and therafter the work has to be accomplished afresh. Thus, he submits, such an exercise could not have been done even with concession from the side of Petitioners.

(3.) Learned AGA appearing for the official Respondents and the private counsel representing the private Respondent, oppose the petition contending that this in writ jurisdiction the stand of the parties would figure as relevant factor for adjudication; the Petitioner- Lakshmamma herself having invited order of the kind, cannot now be permitted to turn around and launch attack thereon. Even otherwise, this court exercising limited supervisory jurisdiction, should not grant indulgence in these matters. So contending, they seek dismissal of the Writ Petition.