ANJINAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Assistant Commissioner, by the impugned order has rejected the application filed by the petitioner by construing it to be an application filed under Form 7.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had actually filed Form 7A under Sec. 77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, but the Additional Deputy Commissioner has wrongly construed the application as an application filed under Form 7.

(3.) Since the petitioner contends that the application that he had filed was under Sec. 77-A of the Act i.e. Form 7A, he would be entitled to challenge this order by filing an appeal. Accordingly, reserving liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned order, this writ petition stands dismissed.