MUNIKRISHNAPPA; KRISHNAPPA N; KRISHNAPPA B M; B M PILLAMUNISHAMI Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT; ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHICKBALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION; TAHSILDAR CHICKBALLAPURA TALUK; JAYARAM; S N VENKATESHAPPA; MUNIKEMPANNA; B M VENKATESHAPPA; STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. The Land Grant Committee invoking jurisdiction under Section 94-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 ('Act' for short) read with Rule 108-B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966 ('Rules' for short), granted the following lands:-

(2.) Having heard the learned Counsel, perused the pleadings and examined the order impugned, undoubtedly, the sequence of events disclose that grants of land in the form of regularization of un-authorised occupation by the petitioners were made under Section 94-A of the Act read with Rule 108-B of the Rules by the Land Grant Committee on the basis of recommendations of the Tahsildar. The said grants when challenged by respondents No.4 to 7 invoking Rule 108K of the Rules for cancellation of grant on various grounds of violation of the Rules relating to such grants, notice issued to the petitioners for verification of such grants were quashed by a learned Single Judge by the order,and proceeding remitted with certain conditions for a fresh consideration. On remand, the Assistant Commissioner having found that no case was made for cancellation of the grant, dropped all further proceedings.

(3.) In the mean while, petitioners having had the benefit of regularisation of unauthorized occupation by orders of the Land Grant Committee, the Tahsildar recorded their names in the Revenue Register as the Kathedars and did so also in the mutation register at MR No.23/2008-2009. Respondents No.4 to 7 aggrieved by M.R.No.23/2008-2009 filed an appeal under sub-Section (2) of Section 136 of the Act on the ground that such entries made by the Tahsildar were incorrect since the grants were illegal. However, respondents No.4 to 7 did not question the dropping of proceedings for cancellation of grant by order Annexure 'J'. Assistant Commissioner apparently having noticed the same declined to interfere by an endorsement, following which Respondents No.4 to 7 filed Revision Petition under sub-Section (3) of Section 136 of the Act before the Deputy Commissioner.