Mr.S.Rajashekar, learned AGA for the appellants.

Mr.Shashi Kiran Shetty, Senior Counsel for Sri Kiran

J., for respondent.

2. This intra-court appeal has been filed against

the order dated 10.08.2017 passed by the learned

Single judge, by which, the order dated 10.10.2014

passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District,

3

Kolar has been quashed and the writ petitions

preferred by the respondent herein has been allowed.

3. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly

stated are that in a proceeding under Section 6 of the

Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition

Act, 1954 (for short, ‘Inams Abolition Act’), the

Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition,

Bangalore by order dated 22.06.1967 in Case

No.2788/1961-62

registered

the

vendor

of

the

respondent,

namely,

Smt.Sarojamma

as

quasi-

permanent tenant. The name of the grantee namely

Sarojamma was entered in the revenue records as per

the

mutation

entry

bearing

MR

No.2/1990-91.

Smt.Sarojamma sold the property bearing Sy.No.160

measuring 22 acres 23 guntas to the respondent vide

registered sale deed dated 23.01.2013. The name of

respondent was thereafter mutated in the revenue

records. The respondent thereafter sought conversion

4

of the land for non-agricultural purposes. On the

aforesaid application made by the respondent, no

orders

were

passed.

The

respondent

filed

W.P.Nos.9423-35/2014 which was disposed of on

10.04.2014

with

a

direction

to

the

Deputy

Commissioner, Kolar District to determine the amount

payable by the respondent by way of conversion fee

and to issue required conversion certificate within a

period of two months.

4. The aforesaid order passed by this Court was

not complied with. Thereupon the respondent

initiated contempt proceedings which was dropped on

27.08.2014 as the Deputy Commissioner filed a memo

stating that the order passed by this Court has been

complied with.

5. The Deputy Commissioner thereafter initiated

proceedings under Section 25 of the Karnataka Land

Revenue Act, 1964 cancelling the revenue entries in

5

favour of the respondent and his vendor on the

ground that the land in question is a gomal land and

could not have been subject matter of proceeding for

grant of occupancy rights under the Inams Abolition

Act.

6. The respondent challenged the afroresaid

order in writ petitions. The learned Single Judge vide

order dated 10.08.2017 quashed the order passed by

the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, Kolar and

allowed the writ petitions preferred by the respondent.

In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has

been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted

that the land in question is a gomal land and could

not have been the subject matter of the proceedings

under the provisions of Inams Abolition Act.

6

8. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel for

the respondent submitted that the order passed by

the learned Single Judge does not call for any

interference.

9. We have considered the submissions made on

both sides and have perused the records.

10. Admittedly, the order dated 22.6.1967 was

passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner under

Section 6 of the Inams Abolition Act. The aforesaid

order was not challenged and has attained the finality.

After a period of 47 years, the Deputy Commissioner

exercised the power under Section 25 of the

Karnataka Land Revenue Act and set aside the

revenue entries in favour of the respondent as well as

his vendor. In effect, the Deputy Commissioner

exercised the power under Section 25 of the

Karnataka Land Revenue Act which is set at naught

7

the order dated 22.06.1967 passed by the Special

Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition, Bangalore

is under the Inams Abolition Act. It is trite law that

the order passed under one Act cannot be set aside

under the provisions of another Act. Besides that, the

Deputy Commissioner could not have set aside the

entries by initiating proceedings after an inordinate

delay of 47 years, for which, no explanation has been

o