CHAMANSAB Vs. PANDURANG PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents 10 and 11. He is permitted to file memo of appearance in four weeks. Since there is delay in filing the appeal, application in I.A. No. 1 of 2013 is filed seeking condonation of delay. In order to consider whether any purpose would be served in issuing notice to the private respondents to consider the application for condonation of delay, we have deemed it proper to hear the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Advocate on the merits of the case.

(2.) The appellant was before the learned Single Judge assailing the order dated 20-1-2003 and the order dated 24-2-2013 passed by the Land Tribunal which were impugned at Annexures-F and G to the writ petition. The said two orders were passed by the Land Tribunal while considering the case of the 1st respondent seeking occupancy rights in respect of the extent of the land indicated in Form 7 and the 2nd order was passed by the Land Tribunal in respect of the proceedings under Sections 66 and 67(3) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 to enquire as to whether the landowner had possessed lands in excess of the ceiling limit as provided under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. The appellant herein is neither a tenant nor a joint owner of the properties. The case of the appellant is that if ultimately the land in respect of which the proceedings under Section 66 of the Act was held is declared to be excess and if the land is vested with the Government, the appellant's claim for grant of the said land would be considered.

(3.) It is in that circumstance the appellant contends that the orders presently passed are not in accordance with the law. To contend so, the learned Counsel for the appellant would also refer to the order dated 4-10-2001, passed in W.P. No. 22306 of 1998 wherein at the first instance when the Government had filed the said writ petition against the order passed by the Land Tribunal, this Court had directed that the proceedings relating to Form 7 and Form 11 be considered together.