Karnataka High Court
T R Ashok vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 February, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF F EBRUARY, 2012, ™ BEFORE WRIT PETITION No.9981/90i0tim" - - -- BETWEEN: T.R.Ashok, Aged about 54 years, . S/o late Sri T.E. Ramegowda, Coffee Planter, Byaravalli village, Mallandur Post -- B7F 130, Avathi Hobli. a Chikmagalur Taluk and District oe (By Sri.A. Ravishankar, Adv ye AND: pone veretaataeiretlsial 1. The State of K farnataka, By its Principal Secretary, . - 'Revenue Department, -. M.S.Buildings,. ~Bangalore - 560 OO]. The Tahasildar, _».... Chikraagalur Taluk, a Chikmagalur ~ 577 101. The Assistant Commissioner, Revenue Sub Division, - "Chikmagalur Taluk -- 577 10]. | ...Petitioner 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Chikmagalur District, Chikmagalur ~ 577 101. 5. Sri T.D.Manjegowda, Aged about 72 years, S/o late Sri.Devegowda, Talihalla, Byaravalli village, Mallandur Post -- 577 130, Avathi Hobili, mo ae : Chikmagalur Taluk and District. ~~ . ...Responcdents -- (By Sri.K.N.Subba Reddy & Sri.Vivek.S.Reddy, Advs., for R5; Sri.Shashidhar.S. Karamadi; HC GP for. R ]- R4) ltr T ae This Writ Petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India praying to quash the order passed by the R4 -- the Deputy. Commissioner, .Chikmagalur District, Chikmagalur in _R.P.No.1/2009-1G dated 23.01.2010 at Annexure -- [email protected]. This petition coming on for preliminary hearing, this day, the Court made the following: ~ . OR DER - In this. writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question, the 7 orders dated 25.02.2009 and 23.01.2010, passed by the ~ respondent 'Nos.3 and 4 in RA No. 1A/2008-09 and RP
| . No.1/2009-10 vide Annexures -- K and Q respectively and also | the order passed by the second respondent in M.R.No. 10/2000- O1 vide Annexure 'D'.
2. By the impugned order at Annexure, 'DY mutation has been effected in favour of the res spondent No.5 in respect of. :
Sy.No.76/4 of Byravalli village measuring 1 acre 24 euntas, out of which 10 guntas is Kharab.
3. By the impugned order vat "Annexure ~ K, the Assistant Commissioner has 5 dismissed the appeal with an observation that the parties shall be bound by the order which may be passed | by the Deputy: Commissioner in the pending proceedings. The petitioner has questioned the order passed by the Assistant 'Commissioner in R.P.No.1/2009-10. The Deputy ¢ Commissioner b y order dated 23.01.2010 has rejected the Revision. Petition confirming the order passed by the i Assistant Comrissioner in R.A. 1A/2008-2009.
SS 4, In the meanwhile, the Deputy Commissioner by ° order dated 10.05.2011 passed in Revision | --
No.DDLR.RP.No.10/2008-09 has allowed the revision petition confirming the phodi done vide proceedings No. ADLR.MPR.265/1991-92.
3. The respondent No.§ has 2 filed" - suit : ins ; O.S.No.316/2007 for declaration and perman nt injunction. The parties have filed a memo. "and their undertaking is recorded.
6. The suit. for declar ation and permanent injunction "4.
eet is pending. The rights of the parties wil be adjudicated in the suit. The impugned orders will be subject to the result of O.S.No.316 /2007. . "This = 'not come in the way of the respondent No.5 challenging the order passed in Revision Ne. DDLR, RP. No. 10/2008 -O9, dated 10.05.2011, if he is so advised, Acordia, the writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE