CHIKKE GOWDA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 29-3-1962, an order was passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, in favour of the father of respondents 3 and 4 registering him as permanent tenant under Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954. Petitioner 1 and father of petitioner 2 and father of petitioners 3 to 6 having approached the Land Tribunal, Kanakapura for grant of occupancy rights in respect of certain extent of land in Sy. Nos. 67, 68 and 69 measuring 4 acres 4 guntas, 4 acres 25 guntas and 4 acres 25 guntas respectively, situated at Hanumanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, occupancy rights were granted on 21-10-1975. Respondents 3 and 4 approached the 1st respondent seeking occupancy rights by filing Form 7-A under the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974. Respondents 3 and 4 sought rectification of the order dated 29-3-1962 by approaching respondent 2 on 17-7-2001. The Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagaram having passed an order granting occupancy rights in favour of respondents 3 and 4 in land bearing Sy. Nos. 67, 68 and 69 of Hanumanahalli Village, Kanakapura Taluk, on 29-7-2005, an appeal having been filed by the petitioner before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, was allowed on 7-12-2011 and thus, the order impugned in the appeal was set aside. Feeling aggrieved, respondents 3 and 4 herein filed W.P. Nos. 47344 and 47345 of 2011. The learned Single Judge having disposed of the said petitions on 25-6-2012, the writ petitioners feeling aggrieved filed W.A. Nos. 4284 and 4285 of 2012. The writ appeals were dismissed on 12-9-2013. Respondents 3 and 4 having approached respondent 1 seeking correction of the survey number in the order passed on 29-3-1962, for the 2nd time, on 27-11-2013, the 1st respondent having forwarded the application to the Tahsildar, Kanakapura Taluk, i.e., 2nd respondent herein, for examination in accordance with law and for submission of the report vide Annexure-S, these writ petitions have been filed to quash Annexure-S.

(2.) Heard Sri Prakash, learned Advocate for the petitioners and perused the writ record. Representation having been submitted by respondents 3 and 4, to 1st respondent, the same has been merely forwarded to the 2nd respondent, for examination in accordance with law and for taking action in accordance with law. The 1st respondent has not passed any order and has not issued any direction to the 2nd respondent to act in the matter in any particular manner. Both the 1st and 2nd respondents are bound to take note of the judgment dated 7-12-2011 passed in Appeal No. 981 of 2006 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and the order dated 25-6-2012 passed in W.P. Nos. 47344 and 47345 of 2011 and also the judgment dated 12-9-2013 passed in W.A. Nos. 4284 and 4285 of 2012. The petitioners can also file their objections before the 2nd respondent, with regard to the attraction of principles of res judicata and the untenability of the claim made by the respondents 3 and 4 herein. The 2nd respondent has only instructed to submit a report, upon lawful examination of the claim and in accordance with law. In the circumstances, there being no order passed prejudicial to the interest of the petitioners, these writ petitions having no cause of action are premature.