IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQR@E¢'_ C~.V_ DATED THIS THE 15"' DAY OF SEPTEMBER, ':2.-G69' 5;: BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. EUSTICE H.N. I§IAG:AMOI'~IAN.'DI~;S' VI' * ' WRIT PETITION N0. 65373-12009"(Ki,R-RES)'~Q'A,.. BETWEEN : Sri.MO1DU KUNHI S/O MAMMUNH1 BEARY I AGED ABOUT 49:YEAR.S I I .. R/A ANTHARAGUTHiI_}iOIJSE ._ KULA VILLAGE, BASN" "4'AL"TQ " MANGALROE, * PETITIONER (By Sri. G RAVI1SHA:+:KAR:I%SEAASI"RY, ADV.) AND: ' V ' % 'V _ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER . ' =OFF]._CE O1? THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER _MA\IC;.AL()R_E_j., D.K.DIST 2 CHAIIAMAN BAGHRU' HOKUM SAGUVALI SAKRALMEEKARANA SAMITHI H * EOST IODUMARGA = BANTWAL TQ, D.K.D1ST. RESPONDENTS
% R KUMAR, HCGP)
c>°’*W’~
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A
PRAYER TO QUASH THE ORDER DT. I 1.8.08 IN APPEAL NO.
606/2008 PASSED EY THE KARNATAKA REVENUE
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE CERTIFIED COPY
OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANX~A AND ETC. .._’
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING
PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, .TI;jIE._C’OfUR_T
PASSED THE FOLLOWING;
0 R D E. R I
In this writ petition the petitioinefhas fot
nature of certiorari to quash the Ordt2r—-e€IE.{t3d”1.I.US¥2008,.i1]..iEpp€aI
No. 606/2008 passed by the Appellate Tribunal
insofar as :itPPte1ate.ste5.t_o rejecting.:.:t1:e ptaj/Pet of the petitioner for an
interim orderuof stay; _ ”
_?j,;Petitioner is ‘an_t1_tIauthorised cultivator of 33 cents of land
in sttifveyt No_.”1t4r’6I33._of Kula village, Bantwal taiuk. The Committee
for R»egu1arisatiOn IoTPUnauthonsed Occupation rejected the claim of
_ the petitioneirlvitie order dated 26.04.2002. Aggrieved by this order
etgtite”comnt1ttee, the petitioner filed an appeal in RAP No.
____”‘I.42/2007-08 before the Deputy Commissioner and the same came to
aim
be dismissed vide order dated 31.03.2008. The Deputy
Commissioner while dismissing the appeal filed by the
directed the jurisdictional Tahsildar to resume possessioniéofs 3
to the Government within two months period. Againspt thi’sv._ord.€r_pp’oii°.,tAn_ T
the Deputy Commissioner, the petitioner filed appeali?.’ae:fore theu”
Tribunal and the same came to be as appe~a1:No5. 6(‘):’6§/2008.
The Tribunal vide order vadniitted appeal
keeping open the limitation point,:i’dire.c_t_Ved_ issue’ notice, called for
records and refusedjtoi stay. wfitvvpetition.
3. Heard the side and perused the entire
writ papers. C’
4.’ The reasoning. of the «Tribunal that there is no executable
order an.d’th.eref0re stayicflafinot be granted is contrary to the facts on
rec.ordp._a. ‘In ord:~:r”_j.passed by the Deputy Commissioner dated
3l.03§2.Q08 _,he’directed the jurisdictional Tahsildar to resume
~ .i’fj;f’possession’ oflthe land in question to the Government and to send
“~co’mplianee report within two months. Therefore the operative
fihwa,
portion of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner”
executable order.
5. For the reasons stated above, the ‘1 ‘A ‘ i
0 R D E V i i
i. Writ petition is hereby
ii. The impugneq. Vlii,_0″§ii?’3VVv;120(l8 iiiaiieai No.
606/2003′ passed_l3yi’ lieyenue Appellate
Tribulnaili it to grant stay is
7 ‘A V
iii. ii order stay, staying the
VA dated 31.03.2008 in RAP No.
‘ ~ by the Deputy Commissioner,
1;,/[arrgalore,ii/tiillthe disposal. of the appeal in appeal No.
T’ pending on the file of the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
-_r’Rs};15092009.