THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL DATED:10.2.2010 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

1. In this writ petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 10.02.2010 passed by the Land Tribunal (Annexure-E) rejecting the application made by the original petitioner for conferment of the occupancy rights, concerned.

2. The relevant facts for adjudication of this petition are that, the original petitioner claims to be the tenant cultivating the land bearing Survey No.197 to an extent of 17 guntas, situated at Hirebidanur Village, Gowribidanur Taluk, Chikkaballapur District. The petitioner had filed an application in Form No.7 seeking grant of occupancy rights. The said application was allowed by the Land Tribunal by order dated 27.11.1986 (Annexure-B). The said order passed by the Land Tribunal was questioned before this Court in LRRP No.1280/1990 and this Court by an order dated 16.11.2000 (Annexure-C) allowed the petition and remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration. In the meanwhile, one of the petitioner’s son appears to have sold the said property to the respondent No.3 as per the registered Sale Deed dated 22.12.2001 (Annexure-D). Accordingly, after remand of the matter, the Land Tribunal by impugned order dated 10.02.2010 (Annexure-E) has conferred the occupancy rights in favour of the respondent No.3 and rejected the application made by the original petitioner seeking occupancy rights. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 10.02.2010 passed by the Land Tribunal at Annexure-E, the original petitioner has presented this writ petition.

3. During the pendency of this writ petition, the original petitioner and respondent No.3 died and their legal representatives have been brought on record.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned AGA.

5. Mr.A.Nagarajappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the application filed by the petitioner herein in Form No.7 is pending consideration before the Land Tribunal. In that view of the matter, without conferment of the occupancy right in favour of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 will not get the right over the property in question. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court.

6. Per contra, Lakshmikanth K, learned counsel appearing for the legal representatives of respondent No.3 submitted that the conferment of the occupancy rights was based on the registered Sale Deed dated 22.12.2001 and therefore, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

7. Learned AGA has produced the original records before this Court.

8. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the Land Tribunal has granted occupancy rights in favour of the original petitioner in respect of the land bearing Survey No.197 to an extent of 17 guntas, situated at Hirebidanur Village, Gowribidanur Taluk, Chikkaballapur District. The said order of the Land Tribunal granting occupancy rights was questioned before this Court in LRRP No.1280/1990 and this Court by an order dated 16.11.2000 allowed the petition filed by the petitioners therein, accordingly, quashed the order of the Land Tribunal dated 27.11.1986 and remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration. After remand made by this Court, the Land Tribunal by its impugned order dated 10.02.2010 has conferred the occupancy right in favour of respondent No.3 based on the registered Sale Deed dated 22.12.2001. However, the Land Tribunal has not considered the application made by the petitioner herein in Form No.7 in terms of Rule 17 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974.

9. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the cou