1- -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED ‘1’I~iIS THE 15?” DAY OF’ DECEM13;E§i§;”:iE5£3§§8 .
§..
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE&R;§V’Ij’V
WRIT PETITION No.9 V9_ 4?V ore’
BETWEEN : V’ % ;
Sri.Shiva Madegowda, ‘ * 2 V ‘
8/0 Late Siddcgowda, ” V A
Aged about 41′ years,
Residing at I\§0.i2;j€i.V-,’ L
96: Main, aw B1oek;_ ” g ”
Ja:/ana@r’,. 1 A
Banga1om–_56Q ”
. . . . PETITIONER
(BY SRI. I;).N.N’ANJi§~£§DA4RE§DDY, SENIOR COUNSEL
AN
FOR K. $HAsH1 KIRAN.__SIIETTY, ADVOCATE.)
Dfigfiiity :”CeI i1:3.3issioI1cr,
Eangalereikural District,
V.V*;TQw¢rV3, Pipdium Block,
D1=.B;”R.An:’1h’¢dkar Road,
_ Bafigalogfe. -.
Assisiant Commissioner,
‘=Ran1a_r.1a@r Sub-Division,
‘Sfi.Tepu,
S/0 Sri.Kuruma Singh,
Aged about 45 years,
R / at Hakkipukki Colorzy,
Bannikuppe Panchayath,
Bidadi 1-iobli, R Taluk,
Bangalore Rural District.
4′
(BY SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, Hes?’ ._}.3′()E?§f;<"_.; 11' &'~2;)f ' ' ~ V 'V "
at * is
This Writ Petitioxms med und.cr.Artic1es Q26 and
227 of the Consi:it11tio'1'1'oof.II1_d}a}pfayixigto call for the
records which has Lfltimatelyw I'CS'fi1tf3£i" passing the
impugned order"d_ated""I4'.V1:1.2306 passed by $2.1 vide
Annexu.re-A andthe oifder d'ated_S–.5~. 12036 passed by K2
vtide A:mex;;z1~:-;ss-._Be'La::s:i 'qLa:a1'sh_ tI*ie=order dated 14.11.2006
passeci by 1-:j_aQ:1d i:§1e4_ofde_r'd.ated"5.5.2O0€~ passed by
12.2 and.–etc, .» V '
" for orders this day, the
Court maéieu me
of the petitioner that the schedule
Sy.No.95 to an extent of two acres
'gsituatergi sat Banmilmppe Village, Bidadi Hobli,
"ii Taluk, Bangalore Rural District was
orignally wanted to tfie third respondent on
10.8.1982. After the expiry of 15 years, perrnission
W
was obtained from the Government for the a1ie1*1ei;i.o1=;VVof
the land and in terms of the Government leiiter.
deed dated 8.9.199'? was execrited. Orr
made by the third respondent,
Assistant Commissioner oi tfiated" '
5.5.2006 set aside the 'for restoration
of the lends under Karnataka
Scheduled eeeeees (Prohibition of
'I'ra1r1si'e-r ef' by the same,
the A' to the Deputy
%%%4.;;.¢ order dated 14.11.2006
dismisseri confirming the order of the
v Comrfiieeéoner. Hence this petition.
'V urged and the prayer made is
idemical. the one raised in Writ Petition
:s:o.994::)2eo7. The said writ petition has been disposed
"irfi" 'hy the order dated 15.12.2008. In View of the
"Common contentions urged by the learned senior
W~"'"
-4-
counsel appearing fer the petitioner and the counsels
appearing for the respondents, this petition is also
disposed ofi’ in terms of the judment dated 35.12.2008
passed in Writ Petition No. 994 1/2007.
For the aforesaid reasons, writ M
devoid of merits is rejected.
No costs.