SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Kar) 905

2007(6) Kar. L.J. 313
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
V.G. SABHAHIT, J.
B. MUNDAPPA RAI AND OTHERS -Appellant
versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS -Respondent
Writ Petition No. 9941 of 2005 (KLR)
Decided on : 20th November) 2006

Advocates Appeared:
Sri Ganesh Bhat YH., Advocate for Petitioners;
Sri H.T. Narendra Prasad, High Court Government Pleader for Respondents.

Headnote:Karnataka Land Revenue Act - Section 67 - Law - Public road - Order of Deputy Commissioner as to existence of- Abeyance of order - Petitioner aggrieved - Held, petitioner should make an application for vacating such order - Cannot be interfered with under writ jurisdiction. [V.G. Sabhahit, J.]: No final order has been passed by the Deputy Commissioner, he has kept in abeyance the order dated 15-12-2004, wherein the existence of public road is ordered to be entered in column (11) of above said survey numbers and it is always open to the petitioner to appear before the Deputy Commissioner and make an application for vacating the order keeping the order dated 15-12-2004 in abeyance and the Deputy Commissioner shall consider the said application before taking any further steps on the basis of the order dated 15-12-2004. Accordingly, at this stage, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner dated 29-1-2005 in exercise of the power of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. However, it is open to the petitioners to appear before the Deputy Commissioner and file an application for vacating the order keeping in abeyance the order dated 15-12-2004 and substantiate their contention about the validity of the order passed in their favour and Deputy Commissioner shall consider the said application, in accordance with law and if the petitioners are aggrieved by the order that may be passed by the Deputy Commissioner after filing the application by the petitioners, it is open to the petitioners to work out their remedy, in accordance with law.

ORDER

This writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 29-12005 passed by the Deputy Commissioner who has kept in abeyance the order dated 15-12-2004 wherein, the Deputy Commissioner had ordered that an entry shall be made regarding the existence of the new 25 feet road.

2. It is the contention of the petitioner that an application was made and after enquiry, the Deputy Commissioner passed an order to enter into column (11) of Sy. Nos. 51/1A1 and 81/1A1A of Bannur Village about the existence of new 25 feet road. However, without issuing notice to the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner has passed an order keeping the said order dated 15-12-2004 in abeyance and directing the Assistant Commissioner to submit a report about the persons who are responsible for making false report.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4.

4. It is clear from the perusal of the order passed in the writ petition that no final order has been passed by the Deputy Commissioner, he has kept in abeyance the order dated 15-12-2004, wherein the existence of public road is ordered to be entered in column (11) of above said survey numbers and it is always open to the petitioner to appear before the Deputy Commissioner and make an application for vacating the order keeping the order dated 15-12-2004 in abeyance and the Deputy Commissioner shall consider the said application before taking any further steps on the basis of the order dated 15-12-2004. Accordingly, at this stage, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner dated 29-1-2005 in exercise of the power of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. However, it is open to the petitioners to appear before the Deputy Commissioner and file an application for vacating the order keeping in abeyance the order dated 15-12-2004 and substantiate their contention about the validity of the order passed in their favour and Deputy Commissioner shall consider the said application, in accordance with law and if the petitioners are aggrieved by the order that may be passed by the Deputy Commissioner after filing the application by the petitioners, it is open to the petitioners to work out their remedy, in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top