HANUMANNA Vs. MACHAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) we have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length and we have been taken through the relevant case papers.

(2.) the appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 14-11-1991 passed by the learned single judge in writ petition No. 20114 of 1991, allowing the writ petition filed by the first respondent herein.

(3.) a detailed narrative of the facts has been given in the order of the learned single judge as well as in the orders made by the deputy commissioner and the assistant commissioner. Hence, it is not necessary for us to repeat the same.