RAMASWAMY REDDY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review petition is filed by the 3rdrespondent in the writ petition seeking review of the order dtd. 27/2/2017 by virtue of which the writ petition was allowed and the respondent-Tahsildar was directed to consider the application filed by the writ petitioner in Form No.50 seeking regularization of unauthorized occupation within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, appearing on behalf of the review petitioner submits that this Court had in fact noticed that occupancy rights were conferred on the 3rdrespondent by Land Tribunal, Anekal Taluk, by its order dtd. 11/4/2007. The 3rdrespondent had filed an application in Form No.7 under the Karnataka (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954, in respect of 2 Acres and 24 Guntas of land in Sy.No.36 of Bandiganahalli village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk. However, the learned Senior Counsel would submit that even after noticing the fact that occupancy rights were conferred on the 3rdrespondent, this Court proceeded to allow the writ petition while directing the respondent- Tahsildar to consider the application filed in Form No.50 at the hands of the writ petitioner seeking regularization of unauthorized occupation of the same land which was already granted in favour of the 3rdrespondent. In fact, it is submitted that the prayer in the writ petition was to set aside the order dtd. 11/4/2007 passed by the Land Tribunal. Learned Senior Counsel therefore submits that the error apparent on the face of the record is that the land in question having been conferred on the 3rd respondent by the Land Tribunal, question of considering the application filed by the writ petitioner for regularization of unauthorized occupation of the same land would not arise.

(3.) Per contra, learned Counsel for the original writ petitioner would contend that there is a delay of 1924 days in filing the review petition and on that ground alone the review petition is required to be dismissed.