JUDGMENT :

1. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 09.11.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.1052-1053 of 2012, by which the petitions were disposed off, the writ petitioner is in appeal.

2. The petitioner filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue writ of certiorari to quash letter bearing No.LND(2)/136(3)/CR:38/1112 dated 21.11.2011 and notice bearing No.RRT/(E)CR/21/1112 dated 04.01.2012. It is stated that the petitioner is a company incorporated with the object of developing houses which are affordable to middle income group. It is stated that with the object of developing housing project, the petitioner identified land bearing Sy.Nos.182 to 189 and 192 of Bommenahalli Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, totally measuring 26 acres 3 guntas and purchased the said land under registered sale deed dated 01.10.2009. The said land is converted land. After purchase, the layout plan was prepared and was approved by Hosakote Planning Authority. The petitioner after obtaining necessary approval from required competent Authorities, obtained sanctioned plan and licence for construction of houses. It is stated that on the pressure of local MLA as the petitioner had refused to comply with the demand of the MLA, notice dated 18.04.2011 was issued by the 2nd respondent stating that the lands in question is a Government Gomal land and that the petitioner should produce the Saguvali chit and other grant records. The petitioner states that reply dated 08.06.2011 was sent to the said notice. Thereafter, another notice dated 23.06.2011 was issued asking the petitioner to produce the original grant certificate and document to show payment of upset price. The petitioner replied on 20.10.2011. On 21.10.2011, the 2nd respondent sent one more notice asking the petitioner to produce documents. Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued notice under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short ‘the Act’) 1964, initiating proceedings. It is stated that the respondents are trying to look into the records of rights and mutation register which admittedly was changed in the year 1930 and 1940. Initially the land was granted by the Government to one Abdul Rehman Saheb in the year 1930 and 1940. The land has been converted from agriculture to non-agriculture. The land in question no more remains Gomal land as alleged and revenue records would clearly indicate the nature of the land. Hence, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition challenging the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, initiating proceedings under Section 136(3) of the Act, contending that there is inordinate delay in initiating the proceedings; that the respondents are trying to misuse the revisional power after lapse of 70 years, which is wholly illegal and contrary to the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court. The learned Single Judge by order dated 09.11.2017 disposed off the writ petition directing the Special Deputy Commissioner to complete the proceedings within the period of four months and to provide with ample opportunity in the proceedings to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner is in appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. Perused the appeal papers.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the proceedings initiated under Section 136(3) of the Act, is barred by time and the respondents could not have initiated the proceedings at this length of time. He further contended that when the Government asserts that the land in question is a Government Gomal land, it is for them to prove that it is a Government Gomal land and it is not for the appellant to disprove the same. It is further contended that the Special Deputy Commissioner has called upon the petitioners to establish their title and virtually he is trying to exercise powers of a civil Court. Thus, prays for allowing the appeal.

5.