MAHADEVAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 23-12-1993 passed by respondent No. 2, i.e., the Assistant Commissioner, Dharwad District, Dharwad in KLR;AP:4:93-94 Dharwad, a copy of that order has been annexed as Annexure C to the writ petition. The petitioner has also sought quashing of the order dated 27-7-1993 passed by respondent No. 3, that is the Tahsildar, Hubli Taluk, District Dharwad, in No. KLR.CR. 1/93-94, Hubli, a copy of which order has been annexed as Annexure A to the writ petition.

(2.) This writ petition along with the application for vacation of the interim order had been listed before me for orders. I have perused the order sheet which persistently indicate, that this petition was listed before the Hon'ble C. Shivappa, J. on 13-1-1994. The learned single Judge passed the following order:

(3.) The brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of final disposal of the writ petition are that respondent No. 4 moved an application under Section 15 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. After disposal of the earlier writ petitions arising out of the same order (Viz., W.P. Nos. 26939 of 1991 and Writ Appeal No. 2430 of 1992) the Tahsildar-respondent No. 3 passed an order on 27-7-1993 which has been annexed as Annexure 'A' to the writ petition, allowing the application of respondent No. 4 under Section 15 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. Having felt aggrieved from the order of 27-7-1993 the petitioner filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Dharwad District, Dharwad, (respondent No. 2). Respondent No. 2, vide order dated 23-12-1993, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure 'C', disposed off and decided the appeal by dismissing the same and by affirming the order passed by the Tahsildar respondent No. 3. Feeling aggrieved from the order dated 23-12-1993, the present petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 4 has filed a counter statement along with the application for vacation of interim order.