Shri Asifali Aashiqueali Sayyed vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 December, 2021

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shri Asifali Aashiqueali Sayyed vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 December, 2021

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                                   1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                      DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                             BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

           WRIT PETITION No.104972/2021 (KLR-RES)

Between

Shri Asifali Aashiqueali Sayyed,
Age: 63 years, Occ: Business,
R/o: 5th Cross, Azamnagar,
Belagavi-590010.                               ...Petitioner

(By Sri. Sharad M.Patil, Advocate)


And

1. The State of Karnataka,
   Revenue Department,

2. ADLR City Survey Office,
   Belagavi, Court Compound,
   Belagavi-590001.

3. DDLR City Survey Office,
   Belagavi, Court Compound,
   Belagavi-590001.

4. Smt. Sujatha, W/o Vinayak Kalpatri,
   Age: 50 years, Occ: Household,
   R/o: House No.4764/A, Chavat Galli,
   Belagavi-590001.
                                   2




5. Shri Praveen Vinayak Kalpatri
   Age: 40 years, Occ: Service,
   R/o: House No.4764/A, Chavat Galli,
   Belagavi-590001.                                  ...Respondents

(By Smt. Girija S.Hiremath, HCGP for R1 to R3)

      This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari and
quash the mutation entries vide Annexure-D passed by the
respondent Nos.2 and 3, Belagavi, and direct the respondents 1
to 3 to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records;
and issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 and
3 to mutate the name of the petitioner in record of rights vide
Annexure-B dated 17.05.2006.

     This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court
made the following:


                              ORDER

Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. Being aggrieved by the mutation entry effected by the Tahsildar concerned in favour of the legal representatives of the deceased vendor of the petitioner, this writ petition is filed.

3. Against the order passed by the Tahsildar concerned effecting mutation entry in favour of the legal representatives of 3 the deceased vendor of the petitioner, an alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal is provided under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. In view of availability of an alternative remedy of appeal, this writ petition is not maintainable.

4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority challenging the mutation entry effected in favour of the legal representatives of the deceased vendor of the petitioner.

Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 is permitted to file memo of appearance in two weeks.

Sd/-

JUDGE Kms

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court