CHANDRA REDDY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioners in these writ petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India have sought for a writ of mandamus directing respondents 3 and 4 to consider their applications pending before them for regularisation of their unauthorised occupation of the government lands and further respondents 3 to 6 not to evict them from the said lands till the applications are disposed of.

(2.) the facts and circumstances of the case, the lands, subject-matter of the petitions, and the parties being common, i propose to dispose of these writ petitions by the following common order.

(3.) brief facts of the case necessary for the disposal of these petitions are as follows: the petitioneis are the residents of sorehunse village, varthur hobli, Bangalore south taluk and are agriculturists. Survey numbers 21 and 23 situated in the said village are government lands. Sy. No. 22 is a hiduvali land situated in between them. It is stated that the petitioners being not only residents of the village varlhur where the lands are situated but also insufficient holders have encroached upon the government lands in sy. Nos. 21 and 23 and have been cultivating them for quite some time. After the enactment of the Karnataka land revenue (Amendment) Act, 1990 by Karnataka Act 2 of 1991 which came into force on 5-2-1991 inserting Section 94-a to the Karnataka land revenue Act, 1964 ('the act for short), they filed applications for regularisation of their unauthorised occupation of the government lands. Those applications have been pending consideration before the committee constituted for the purpose and before passing a final order on the said applications, the tahsildar, respondent 4 herein, by his order dated 7-12-1990 in case No. Ncr 54 of 1990-91, directed the village accountant, respondent 6 herein, 10 evict the petitioners from the lands they occupied unauthorisedly. This action, according to them, was illegal and therefore they filed an appeal in No. 7 of 1991 before the assistant commissioner seeking to set aside the said order of the tahsildar. Thereafter, presuming that the said appeal was disposed of by the assistant commissioner, chandra reddy, petitioner in W.P. No. 5535 of 1992, filed an application for a certified copy of the order made in the appeal, for which the assistant commissioner, by his endorsement, Annexure e, dated 16-7-1991, informed him that the case in No. Ra, 7 of 1991-92 was clubbed in ncr. Cr. 24/1991-92 with a direction to the tahsildar to evict the unauthorised occupants from the g overnment lands and that therefore question of issuing any copy did not arise. This endorsement was the subject-matter of appeal before the deputy commissioner, respondent 2 herein, in miscellaneous appeal No. 3 of 1991-92 which came to be disposed of by an Order, Annexure g, dated 31-7-1991 by setting aside the endorsement of the assistant commissioner and remitting the matter for fresh enquiry, in accordance with law. It is seen from the records that thereafter the assistant commissioner by his order dated 12-3-1992 dismissed the appeal and that order has not been challenged before the competent authority.