MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ELURU Vs. K SAROJINI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is rightly urged by Sri T. Veerabhadraiah, learned counselappearing for the respondents in this batch of revision petitions that the revision petitions are not maintainable, in that the impugned orders are passed by the learned District Judge, West Godawari at Eluru acting only as a persona designata and not as a court.

(2.) Section 29 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) TownPlanning Act, 1920, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', provides for a right of appeal to the concerned District Judge by any party aggrieved by any decision of the arbitrator under Clause (c) or Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 27 of the Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Act lays down that the decision of the arbitrator and, when an appeal is preferred under sub-section (1), the decision on such appeal shall be final and binding on all persons.

(3.) It may be thus noted that finality is attached to the decision of theDistrict Judge concerned on an appeal preferred to him by a party aggrieved by the decision of the arbitrator. The decision of the District Judge cannot be challenged in this court in the absence of any specific provision providing for a further right of appeal or revision.