C GANGADHARA MURTHY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioner in this writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India has sought to quash the orders (annexures-k, c and b), dated 1-1-1992, 16-9-1991 and 26-6-1991 passed by respondents 2 to 4 herein respectively, for the reasons stated therein.

(2.) a few facts that are necessary for the disposal of this petition are as follows: the petitioner is the owner of a part of an agricultural land hearing sy, No. 47 of Sri Gandhadakavalu Village, Yeshawantapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. There was a partition amongst the members of his family and the ancestors of respondent 7 as disclosed in detail in revision petition No. 191 of 1991 presented by the petitioner before the tribunal, respondent 2 herein. It has come on record that subsequent to the partition, respondent 7 got the land measured and phoded as 47/1-a and 47/1-b by the assistant director of land records and survey settlement, without notice to the petitioner and while doing so, the land measuring 3 acres 20 guntas in the possession of the petitioner for the last 40 years was included to the portion of respondent 7 and measured. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the deputy director of land records, respondent 5 herein, for cancelling the durasth of the land made by the assistant director of land records. Respondent 5, after enquiry, allowed the appeal and directed the assistant director of land records to hold a detailed enquiry into the matter and to pass an appropriate Order after notice to all the parties including the petitioner. That Order was challenged by respondent 7 before the joint director of survey settlement and land records, respondent 5 herein, who, by his Order (annexure-b) dated 26th june, 1991 in n. J.d.l.r. revision petition No. 6 of 1989-90, set aside the Order (annexure-a) made by the deputy director of survey settlement and land records with a direction to the assistant director of survey settlement and land records to give effect to the orders mpr. 33/1986-87 and adl. Bn. Mpr. 139/1986-87 dividing sy. No. 47 as 47/1-a and 47/1-b.

(3.) aggrieved by the said Order of respondent 4, the petitioner took up the matter before the director of survey settlement and land records, respondent 3 herein, in revision No. 16/1991-92, who, by his Order (annexure-c) dated 16-9-1991, dismissed the revision petition of the petitioner and confirmed the Order made by the joint director of survey settlement and land records. While doing so, the director reconsidered the case as if it was a revision petition and then passed the said order. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said Order, approached the Karnataka appellate tribunal, respondent 2 herein, in revision petition No. 191 of 1991. The tribunal by its Order dated 18-11-1991 admitted the revision petition and ordered status quo till the hearing date i.e., 4-12-1991, as can be seen from the copy of the Order sheet, annexure-f. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application (la. No. I) for stay of operation of the orders under revision, which came to be dismissed by Order dated 5-12-1991 on the ground that the orders under revision were not executable orders and that therefore stay as sought for was unnecessary. Subsequently, the tribunal took up the aforesaid revision petition of the petitioner along with other number of similar petitions for hearing, heard the learned counsel on both sides and dismissed them by its common Order dated 1-1-1992, as not maintainable. Hence this petition.