BASAPPA NINGAPPA BANAKAR Vs. LAND TRIBUNAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ Petition, the Petitioner has prayed this Court to quash the impugned order dated 4.10.2002 vide Annexure -F passed by the 1st Respondent and also to quash the orders dated 18.10.2002 and 4.10.2002 issued by the 3rd Respondent vide Annexures -J and K respectively.

(2.) THE case of the Petitioner is that the matter was pending consideration before the Land Tribunal. The Land Tribunal has recorded the evidence of the Petitioner and the contesting Respondents and when the matter reached final stage, without any application by any of the parties, on 4.10.2002, it suo motu exercised powers under Section 48 -C by appointing the Tahsildar as the Receiver of the suit lands and directed him to auction the standing crop and to dispose it of in the best possible way, and deposit the amount so realised, to the account of the Government. Thereafter, by his order dated 18.10.2002 vide Annexure -J, the Tahsildar issued a direction to the Revenue Inspector and also the Village Accountant to issue notice regarding holding of public auction and also directed that neither the Petitioner nor Respondents 4 and 5 are entitled to participate in the said auction. The Tahsildar has also directed the Sub -Inspector of Police to see that neither of the parties cut the standing crop, vide order dated 4.10.2002 Annexure -K. Assailing the said orders, the Petitioner has presented this writ Petition.

(3.) THE principal submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that, the impugned orders are passed behind the back of the Petitioner without giving an opportunity to him. It is contended by him that the reason assigned for appointing the Receiver was to maintain peace between the parties and the same is contrary to the material on record. It is further contended by him that the Land Tribunal has acted without jurisdiction. To substantiate his submission, he placed reliance on the Judgment of this Court reported in the case of N.A. Narasimhiah and Ors. v. Gowramma and Ors. 1979 (2) Kar.L.J. 259 wherein this Court has held that the Tribunal has nothing to do with the maintenance of peace and the tribunal also acted without jurisdiction in appointing the receiver only on the basis of the report of the Sub -Inspector of Police without affording opportunity to the parties. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.