TIPPAVVA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondents 1 to 4. Learned counsel Sri. B. Mohammed Ali accepts notice for respondent No.5.

(2.) Petitioner claim that he is the owner in possession of Survey No.253/2A/1 measuring 4 acres situated at Itigi village, Taluk Ron and District Gadag and his name was mutated in revenue records by the respondent No.4. However, respondent No.4 without issuing notice to the petitioner has mutated the name of respondent No.5 in column No.9, 11 and 12 of the records of rights. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the impugned mutation entry effected in favour of respondent No.5 is in violation of the principles of natural justice, since no notices were issued to the petitioner. Hence, he submits that the impugned mutation entry requires to be quashed.