GUDDANAGOUDA TIRUKANAGOUDA PATIL Vs. ASST COMMISSIONER HAVERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner has sought for the following reliels :

(2.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the appeal preferred before the Assistant Commissioner, Haveri under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the order dated 31-8-1987 passed by the Tahsildar, Heveri in Case No RTR. CR. 121/87-88 was not maintainable because the order of the Tahsildar did not fall either under Section 128 or under Section 129 of the Act. Hence the order of the Assistant Commissioner is without jurisdiction. It is also further contended that the Tahsildar has passed the order in exercise of his administrative power, therefore, the Assistant Commissioner should have not have entertained the appeal.

(3.) It appears to me that these two contentions apart from the fact that they cannot at all be permitted to be raised for the first time in the writ petition, are devoid of merit.