IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BAN GALORE --
DATED THIS THE 23"" DAY or
BEFORE
N NO3139 ()P'.2{!i}';£i'(1:.R)':':
WRIT PETITIO
BETWEEN:
'v'i<iyarar=ya High 3:55.92, V _
Madihal, Dharwad, By'-its Secretary " V __
Sri.Srikant,T.Pati1,ff' OI. 1 O,
Aged abciut years? =i ''
Occ: Adv§;ggita,--':VDhar§1\{$d._.V ..PE'I'ITIONER
(By"S;i:S:_;f5.i€i;.ikan§i»."--Ad§r;)"' A
"'°v-IE2. A
V .1, T116"Af.§sis.té:ntOCdfiimissioner,
AA 1.......; - - -
7 Han w-" Sub=I}1v:s:on,
" :,;rr).c:,comp:.und, Dharwad.
bro" ..
.. W./Q Amrrztappa Vikrant Matt,
MTajj_or; Occ: Agriculture,
' Rfa"'Mruthyunj aya Nagar,
A ~ *,Dl1_:_1_rwa.d.
LA) R
. Shantha 'v'ccraiah, Sfo Airru'-"jrspa Vikra" Matt,
Major, Occ: Agriculture,
R/0 Mruthyunjaya Nagar,
Dharwad.
v1.fe..»'
km)
4. Ra.-haiah, S19 Amruteppa Vi..re:1t watt,
Major, Oec: Agriculture,
Rio Mruthyunjaya Nagar,
Dharwad.
La?!
. His Holiness Sri.lvia.Ni.Pra.Siivivayogi'ivialiesWé.nii.gai_ti,'' * .
Murugamat,Dharwad, *
By its Administrative Offieer,
c:«,.-.,..u....4:n...._: 1 g 2 ~ ~.
oavauuutu nuuu, _ V. A 'V 1 2
Dharwad. ' V..RESP\Z)_NDE*NTS
{RV Sri_Nn
W, .. ..
scan: II \.ll5-.I. 1' , l.l\...zf\-HI
iga S"i_xranandnpri-e- "V '1' 'Pei
Sri.Santosh.B.Mane;~ «.Ad'.i_r. for
iq'3R»'.5'}~l _
Tl1.i3-Writ Péetiti_,0t1'V.~¢is-filediinderi Articles 226. and 227 of
the Conétitution of India proving tofiuash the order dt.12.3.08
on I.iA.No.Il"" 'p.assed_-- tithe-.»' Bangalore, in Appeal
No,_853#.Q7(l2eye1iue)beingarbitrary, erroneous and opposed to
iew, ei1%ijestiee' vicie. z'~'{n:ieX.E.
. ~ .1 . I nnnn .....
..Th:.,=.' '.7-Jrrtrketrtron coming on for ].':i'fiiifi'i'u'ia":v uI:u.1I.|15
5 this day, the Court made the following:
0 R. D E R
i."Vii:if_V,er:1med Government Pleader is directed to take notice.
2. Petitioner has sought for to quash the order of the
KAT, Bangalore, passed on I.A.No.II dated 12.3.08 in Appeal
No.853/0'7. .519"
Heard the learned Centre} for the petitioner, the
learned Counsel appearing for the caveatorfrespozliderirt No.5
and the learned Govemment Pleader.
4. 1'-'1""r'.'I"'dli'1g t" t"e _petitioner,. petitiener' is afcompesite
Pre-University college 'Flchool situated at
Dharwad. Earlier' thepetitioner/Institution said
_o hair- .-1l_d l.o.f'?.;-.,.r 'toe land measuring 3
acres igztllssilliri Sy.No.-44A situated at
be rejected by the 1"'
responderltfigssistaiittCommissioner against which, appeal was
was "admitted and an order of status--quo was issued on
filed; later, on the objections filed by the
he _ "leontesti§sj respondents herein, the KAT said t-. haxe .e_}'ee.ed
t’l1e:l’.A.l’o.II i”ea and thereby the order of status-quo granted
ll 13.8.07 came to be vacated. Hence, this petition.
Jgz
r .
5. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the
petitioner that when once the matter has “and an
order of status-quo was granted, the _hav_e
.1:._.._.’…….1 1.. ….
ulamnsacu f
argument, he relied upon the decision iinij’;Ili.Ri :l’988
KAR 2814 in the case iio’f.ii_Nlunilalcslitnamrrta Vs. Deputy
Commissioner and’-one of the Supreme Court
reported in (-1982 bu.,j4zs¢+_’in_ the ease of lviooi Chane I dav
Jinn __j 17_
{-
and –,Bula:id Company Ltd., Rampur
andothetsi, a::;/o ..
“Pct-‘eon-tra,~~~”iiithe learned Counsel appearing for the
coatesting ‘respondents has submitted that earlier the Form
ii — by the petitioner before the authorized oftieer was
iagriculttlral land. Although, at the threshold, status–quo was
granted before the KAT, when it was found that the land in
question is a non-agricultural land and that it is a playground,
A A
the IA. filed has been rightly rejected.
. .v_I ., ~ V _’-
p ie-“tie”. filec-E. Aeeoram-.gl»;’, ti’: support of has
7. In the instant case, the land in question issaid to be a
playground and admittedly it is not an land.
Furthermore, at the inception if any such__o:rd.er’ status;~gue»_is
petitioner cannot claim to .e_ontin”uei the tl1e_T;di’isposel of
the appeal. Moreover, wseuhmitted the respondents’
Course! when pr1.. .. – ;1-t rn.=;I._e out -3.» eontinue
the order _o’t’V_statt1s+quoj« the_”sarne. rightly rejected by the
KAT. of”the»iproceedings, which need not
tore’. the ‘appellate”lTribL1nal cannot be directed to
…”..a..:… …’..i’*… J…-;£ .”..« 4 ‘ *
ma lI.i1lll’fl.Hg ?u’r. L’;’a1.:.”I.’l.’IS”‘q’l.i{‘l till the disposal of the aepeal
_ _vandiii’t-»is” fore-the-._sati’sfaction of the appellate Tribunal to pass
appropriate ‘orders. There is no merit in the contention of the
it ‘ However, it is for him to press for early disposal of
the appeai.
Uta
FL
“I5