IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.9105/2018 (LR – RES) BETWEEN:
1. M.MUNIRAJU S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
2. SMT.RATHNAMMA W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.
3. SRI MUNIBYRAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.
4. SMT.SAVITHRAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA, D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.
5. M.RAMAMURTHY S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
6. SMT.MUNIRATHNAMMA @ AMMAYA W/O VENKATESH, D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/AT SEETHANAYAKANAHALLI, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TLAUK, BANGALAORE URBAN DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS [BY SMT.J.KALADEEPA, ADV. FOR SRI G.S.PATIL, ADV.] AND:
1. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (FOR ABOLITION OF INAMS), NOW THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560009 2. RAJAPURA MUTT, RAJAPURA JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562106 REP. BY ITS MATADIPATI …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI B.S.BUDIHAL, HCGP FOR R-1.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE: NIL PASSED BY THE R-1 IN CASE NO.42/1961-62 VIDE ANNX-B, CONSEQUENTLY REGISTERING THE PETITIONERS AS PERMANENT TENANTS THROUGH THEIR GRANDFATHER LATE DYAPAIAH IN RESPECT OF 1 ACRE 30 GUNTAS OF LAND IN SY.NO.226/2, OLD SY.NO.30 OF RAJAPURA VILLAGE, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to accept notice on behalf of the respondent No.1.
2. Petitioners claiming to be grandchildren of one Dyapaiah have filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the first respondent in Case No.42/1961-62 at Annexure-B to the writ petition, interalia seeking a direction to register the petitioners as permanent tenants in respect of 1 acre 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.226/2, old Sy.No.30 of Rajapura village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District.
3. It is contended by the petitioners that on receipt of the suit summons from the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.547/2013 filed by the third parties in respect of the land in question, it has come to their knowledge that in the year 1962 permanent tenancy rights were granted to their grandfather to an extent of 31 guntas in Sy.No.226/2 plaintiff Rajapura Village instead of 1 acre 31 guntas purchased by their grandfather under the registered sale deed dated 06.06.1950.
4. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have filed revision petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District in Revision Petition No.340/2015-16, challenging the order of the Assistant Commisioner dated 30.10.2015 in R.A[A].86/2014-15 relating to the very same lands in question. The said Revision Petition is pending for adjudication before the competent authority.
5. In such circumstances, parallel proceedings initiated by the petitioners, challenging the order passed in the year 1962 by the respondent No.1, mainly on the ground that the said order was not communicated to them is not maintainable. It is hard to accept such a contention of the petitioners at this length of time as the order impugned passed in the year 1962 has attained finality and the third parties are claiming the rights over the same.
6. It is also an admitted fact that O.S.No.547/2013 is pending before the competent Civil Court pertaining to the very same lands in question, no disputed questions of facts can be adjudicated in the writ jurisdiction..
It is apparent that the writ petition is frivolous in nature and the same requires to be dismissed as devoid of merits. Accordingly, Writ Petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to seek redressal of their grievance before the competent Forum in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.