K P NANJUNATH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from the order of Venkataramiah, J., in Writ Petition No. 5812 of 1974. The appellants and the defendants herein were the petitioners and the respondents respectively in the writ petition. For the sake of convenience, the appellants will hereinafter be referred to as the petitioners.

(2.) The facts of the case are briefly these: The land bearing Survey No.23 of Baggasagodu village in Chickmagalur District, is a Gomal land. The first petitioner had applied in about the year 1960 for grant of 10 acres of land in this Survey number. The villagers opposed the grant of land to him. The Revenue authorities rejected his application for grant of land about 10 years later, respondent 4 made an application for grant of 20 acres of land in this survey number for coffee cultivation in the Mahzar prepared by the Revenue official some villagers including two of the appellants stated that they had no objection to grant of the land applied for by respondent 4 for coffee cultivation. The Deputy Cominissioner, Chickmagalur District (respondent 3), by his order dated 28-1-1971 (Exhibit A), granted 20 acres of land to respondent 4 at an upset price of Rs. 500 per acre, subject to certain conditions including the condition that there should be brought under coffee cultivation within 3 years from the date of taking possession of the land. Against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, the petitioners preferred an appeal to the Divisional Commissioner Mysore Division, (respondent 2) who dismissed the appeal the further appeal by the petitioners was dismissed by the Government (respondent 1) by its order dated 14-9-1974. In the writ petition, the petitioners assailed the orders of the Deputy Commissioner, the Divisional Commissioner and the Government.

(3.) The learned single judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the petitioners had not placed any materials to show that the extent of Gomal was insufficient and -that the Deputy Corninissioner had specifically stated that the extent of Gomal was in excess of the requirement of the village. The learned single Judge also observed that some of the petitioners who were themselves applicants for grant of this land, had filed the writ petition because they were not able to secure the grant in their favour.