RAMASWAMY Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELLARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS, questioning the correctness of the impugned order dated 3rd january 2007 in proceedings Appeal prakarana No. 22/2004-05 on the file of the first respondent vide Annexure-V have presented the instant writ petition.

(2.) THE Grievance of petitioners in the instant writ petition is that, an extent of 6. 55 acres of land in Sy. No. 63/a/3 situate at boodguppa Village, Siruguppa Taluk, Bellary district was being cultivated by the grandfather of these petitioners late Sri Fakirappa and thereafter, the same was being continued by the father of petitioners late Sri Basanna, after the death of the grandfather late Fakirappa. After the death of the grandfather of petitioners, deceased sri Basanna, i. e. the father of petitioners herein has succeeded the property in question and thereafter, he has filed the application for grant of occupancy rights under the provisions of the Karnataka Certain Inams abolition Act (Ryotwari Patta ). The said application filed by deceased Basanna is alleged to have been considered by the competent authority and the Tahsildar has passed the order dated 30th March, 1988 bearing No. LRM. 14/88-87 vide Annexure-G stating that, the applicant Sri. Basanna is absent and after verifying the RTC extract, the name of deceased-Basanna is found and the same is to be continued in patta column. When things stood thus, the further case of petitioners is that, Form No. II has been issued under the provisions of Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977 granting the said land in favour of late sri. Basanna on 29th May, 2002 bearing No. Revenue/inam/14/86-87 vide Annexure-H. After the death of the father of petitioners-late Sri. Basanna, petitioners herein have submitted the application dated 15th May 2004 vide Annexure-L before the third respondent-Tahsildar, Siruguppa Taluk and the Tahsildar, siruguppa instead of recording the names of these petitioners in the relevant RTC extract and other revenue records, has. in turn, after considering the request made by these petitioners, issued the endorsement dated 1st July, 2004 vide Annexure-M, rejecting the request of these petitioners. Assailing the correctness of the said endorsement issued by the third respondent, petitioners herein have filed the appeal before the second respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Bellary Sub-Division, bellary. The said appeal had come up for consideration before the second respondent on 24th June, 2006 in proceedings No. Revenue/ appeal/22-2004-05 vide Annexure-T. The second respondent set aside the endorsement issued by third respondent and directed the third respondent to issue notice to the parties and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Assailing the correctness of the order passed by the second respondent dated 24th june, 2006 vide Annexure-T, petitioners herein have filed an appeal before the Deputy commissioner, Bellary, the first respondent herein in Appeal Prakarana No. 22/2004-05. The first respondent in turn, after hearing the petitioners and other parties to the proceedings and after careful perusal of the entire material available on record, threadbare, by assigning cogent reasons, has dismissed the appeal filed by petitioners and set aside the order dated 17th June, 2004 passed by tahsildar, Siruguppa and also the order dated 30th August, 1988 bearing No. Inam/14/88-87 including Form No. II issued dated 29th may, 2002 and remanded the matter back to third respondent to reconsider the same and pass appropriate orders.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel appearing for petitioners, Sri Gode Nagaraj for considerable length of time.