DR. C. RAMESH, S/O LATE CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in these writ petitions is to the order dated 12.09.2013 passed by the Deputy' Commissioner, Bangalore District, Bangalore in Survey Revision Petition No.5/2012-13 whereby the revision petition tiled under Sec. 56(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 by writ petitioners has been dismissed. The Deputy Commissioner has held that grievance made by petitioners regarding 30 ft. road as to whether it fell in the middle of the lands belonging to petitioners and 8th respondent herein could not be decided by him because the said dispute was required to be decided by the competent Civil Court. The Deputy Commissioner has thus upheld the order dated 21.03 2012 passed by the Deputy Director of Survey Settlement and Records/Ex-officio Technical Director, in respect of land bearing Sy. No.83 sub-divided into Sy.Nos. 83/1 and 83/2 situated at Byatarayanapura, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North (Additional) Taluk. The Deputy Director had dismissed the appeal filed before him challenging the hissa phodi conducted in the year 2004 whereby the property was assigned Sy. Nos.83/1 and 83/2 based on the partition deed dated 24.01.2002.

(2.) It is not in dispute that as per the partition deed, 1 acre of land fell to the share of respondent No.8 herein - Smt. Bhavani and 2 acres 15 guntas fell to the share of other sharers namely petitioners 1 to 4 herein. Based on the partition deed dated 24.01.2002, 8th respondent herein appears to have applied for effecting phodi of the land. The Assistant Director of Land Records get the phodi and survey conducted and effected phodi and durast of the old Sy. No.83 which was divided into 83/1 and 83/

(3.) As already stated above phodi was effected in the year 2004. For nearly 7 years petitioners did not make any grievance regarding the phodi conducted. They challenged it on 17.02.2011 before the Deputy Director of Land Records by filing an appeal. It was contended that phodi was conducted behind the hack of petitioners and was therefore, illegal. Appeal filed was resisted. The Deputy Director dismissed the appeal vide his order dated 21.02012. Said order of the Deputy Director was challenged before the Deputy Commissioner by way of revision which has also been dismissed on 12.09.2013 by the impugned order produced at Annexure-C. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy Director and the hissa phodi conducted in the year 2004, petitioners have filed this writ petition.