Karnataka High Court
Smt. Lakshmamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 June, 2019
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
Bench: S.N.Satyanarayana
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA
WRIT PETITION NO.358 OF 2016 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
SMT.LAKSHMAMMA,
W/O APPANNA,
AGED 75 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE,
BIDADI HOBLI,
RAMANAGARA TALUK
AND DISTRICT-570 030. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: SADASHIVAIAH K G, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE -560001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT,
RAMANAGARA- 570030.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
2
RAMANAGARA SUB-DIVISION,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT,
RAMANAGARA -570030.
4. THE TAHASILDAR,
RAMANAGARA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT -570030. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT : B P RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE R2
IN R.P.NO.72/2015-16 FILED BY THE R4 IN RESPECT OF LAND
BEARING SY.NO.15 MEASURING 1.20 ACRES OF
SHESHAGIRIHALLI VILLAGE, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND
DISTRICT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The petitioner herein is seeking quashing of the proceedings pending before the second respondent - Deputy Commissioner, Ramanagara District in Revision Petition No.72/2015-16, filed by the fourth respondent - Tahsildar herein, which is in respect of land bearing Sy.No.15 measuring 1 3 acre 20 guntas of Sheshagirihalli Village, Ramanagara Taluk and District.
2. Admittedly, the present dispute with reference to the land bearing Sy.No.15 measuring 1 acre 20 guntas of Sheshagirihalli Village, Ramanagara Taluk and District is on the basis that the same was granted in favour of the petitioner, which according to the contesting respondent - State is the Government property, for which fake documents are created by the petitioner as if it is granted in her favour. Admittedly, the said matter is pending consideration before the second respondent - Deputy Commissioner of Ramanagara District in proceedings in Revision Petition No.72/2015-16, which is sought to be quashed in this proceedings.
3. This court, after giving careful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties, would observe that the question of quashing the proceedings does not arise, instead it would be suffice to state 4 that the second respondent -Deputy Commissioner shall hear the revision petition No.72/2015-16 and dispose of the same in accordance with law, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bss.