LAXMAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the tenant / claimant, who had filed Form No.7 under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short "the Act, 1971") claiming the occupancy rights of the following lands:

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the material on record.

(3.) Facts leading to filing of this writ petition as revealed from the records, narrated briefly are that the petitioner had filed Form No.7 claiming occupancy rights of the schedule lands after coming into force of the Act No.1 of 1974. It appears that Smt. Yashoda @ Mathura and Smt. Kanthu Bai had also filed two separate Form No.7 claiming occupancy rights of the lands bearing Sy.Nos.49/3 & 54/2. Initially the Land Tribunal, by order dtd. 17/2/1976 had considered Form No.7 filed by Smt. Yashoda @ Mathura and had granted the occupancy rights of the land bearing Sy.No.49/3 in her favour. By a separate order dtd. 23/4/1976, Form No.7 filed by Smt. Kanthu Bai was considered by the Triubnal and occupancy rights of the portion of the lands bearing Sy.No.49/3 was granted in her favour. Thereafter, by order dtd. 19/12/1978, Form No.7 filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Tribunal. Challenging the aforesaid three orders passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner had filed W.P. No.25063/1994 before this Court on the ground that the Tribunal was not justified in passing three separate orders in respect of the Form No.7 filed within the prescribed time, on the ground that the Tribunal ought to have clubbed all the three Form No.7 and thereafter passed a common order.