L NARASEGOWDA Vs. HUTCHAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition the petitioner has sought for the order calling for the record of Village Panchayath Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1984-85 and for issuance of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 31-3-1986, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Tumkur Sub-Division, Tumkur, whereby the Assistant Commissioner has allowed the appeal and has directed the village panchayath to cancel the licence issued to the petitioner i.e., respondent No. 3 in the appeal.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are that the present petitioner who claims to be the owner of the site Khaneshumari No. 47 of Gundinapalya, applied for grant of a licence to construct a building as well as to run the flour mill therein. The said licence was granted by respondent No. 3 to the present writ petitioner namely secretary of the Village Panchayath, Hiredoddavadi, on 21-7-1984. That licence was granted to install the flour mill under Section 55 of the Karnataka Village Panchayat and Local Boards Act, 1959. The petitioner has annexed the copy of that general licence as Annexure B, while the licence which had been granted for construction of the building is dated 26-5-1977 and copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure A. Present respondent No. 1 filed V.P.C. Appeal challenging the grant of licence dated 21-7-1984, contending that he is the owner of the building in which the petitioner had installed the flour mill, and on the ground that running of the flour mill lead to injury inconvenience and annoyance. That appeal was numbered as Appeal No. 9 of 1984-85. The Assistant Commissioner, Tumkur Sub-Division, acting as the appellate court had taken the view that both the parties have failed to prove their ownership over the property and Village Panchayath also failed to produce relevant document after having based on which the licence had been granted. So for want of these details, the appellate authority took the view that it could not not come to any conclusion regarding the prima facie title of either of the parties and directed the Village Panchayath to cancel the licence, if any granted in favour of respondent No. 3.

(3.) Having felt aggrieved from the judgment and order dated 31-3-1986, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Tumkur Sub- Division, in the aforesaid appeal, the present petitioner has filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No counter affidavit has been filed in this case. The petition has to be decided on the allegations made in the writ petition.