The exercise of administrative powers under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act must occur within a reasonable time frame to protect property rights.

ORAL COMMON ORDER

These three writ petitions are filed by the same petitioner and the disputes involved in all three writ petitions are also connected to each other and therefore, these three writ petitions are clubbed together, heard and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1870/2010 seeking a direction to the respondent authorities for effecting measurements, mapping of sub-division and apportionment of assessment in respect of the sub- divisions and further for mutations as contemplated under Rule 72 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, with respect to the land purchased by the petitioner under a registered sale deed dated 21.07.2003, measuring 4 acres 30 guntas in Survey No.26 of Maligondanahalli Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. During the course of the said writ petition, it was stated on behalf of the respondent authorities that they are unable to proceed with the survey and phodi proceedings due to non-availability of the records in the office of the Tahsildar. This Court held that the revenue authorities cannot decline to conduct the phodi on the ground that the records are not available. Nevertheless, this Court directed the respondent authorities to do everything possible to retrieve the file. Nevertheless, in spite of best efforts, if the file is not traced, they are directed to build up a parallel file as per the procedure in vogue. Further, the Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk was directed to consider the petitioner's representation for surveying the land, holding the phodi operation and preparing the akarband, etc., in accordance with law. It was directed that the entire exercise should be completed within four months from the date of the order.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after such order was passed by this Court, since there was interference at the hands of one Sri.R.Ravikumar, the petitioner approached the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar passed an order in proceedings bearing No.TQ.PR.1/2010-11 stating that after verification of the records, it is found that in survey No.26 of Marigondanahalli, which was earlier an Inam village, had a total extent of 56.18 hectares and the Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams abolition had passed various orders re-granting lands to various persons. One such grantee was late Sri.Muniyappa. The petitioner herein purchased the lands in question from the children of Sri.Muniyappa. However, it was found that the respondent therein, namely, Sri.R.Ravikumar also had purchased the lands in the same survey number from a different grantee. It was later identified that the two lands are separate and the identification of the two lands was also made and accordingly, the matter was disposed of, with a direction to proceed to conduct the phodi in favour of the petitioner in terms of the boundaries found in the sale deed belonging to the petitioner.

4. Nevertheless, when the phodi proceedings were not completed, the petitioner initiated contempt proceedings in CCC.No.1263/2010. During the course of the proceedings, since it was submitted on behalf of the respondent authorities, that notices for the survey have been issued to the neighbouring landowners, the contempt proceedings were accordingly closed, recording the submission made on behalf of the respondent authorities that the phodi proceedings will be conducted subsequent to the adjoining landowners being served with the notices.