IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.4142/2019 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN DAVANAIAH, S/O LATE BADDAIAH @ MARA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT BYREGOWDANAHALLI, MALLARABANAVADI POST, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-562 123. PETITIONER ( BY SRI S. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE ) AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, ‘KANDHAYA BHAVAN’ BANGALORE-560 009. RESPONDENT (SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO DISPOSE OFF THE UNNUMBERED REVISION PETITION FILED ON 26.08.2017 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT i.e., DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, ‘KANDAYA BHAVAN’, BANGALORE-560 009 WITHIN THREE MONTHS VIDE ANNEXURE ‘A’ TO THE PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the respondent.
2. The petitioner is seeking writ of mandamus to the sole respondent, namely, Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, to consider and dispose of his unnumbered Revision Petition filed on 26.08.2017 before the respondent within three months.
3. According to the petitioner, he filed Revision Petition before the respondent on 26.08.2017, wherein he is said to have impugned the order dated 28.06.2017 vide Annexure ‘C’ to the petition passed in appeal No.R.A.(BN):178/2014-15 on the file of the Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North sub-division, Bengaluru.
4. Perusal of the said order dated 28.06.2017 discloses that the appeal in R.A.(BN):178/2014-2015 was filed by one Papaiah challenging the order of mutation in M.R. No.H7/2012-2013 in respect of the land measuring 01 Acre in Sy. No.39/2, new Sy. No.39/2B1, situate at Byregowdanahalli village, Dasanapura hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. In the said appeal, the petitioner herein was arrayed as the respondent.
5. Since the particulars of the Revision Petition provided by the petitioner are incomplete, the question of issuing direction as sought for in the petition does not arise.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed.
7. Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to file memo of appearance within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE sma