IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.14821/2017 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
REV. MOTHER GENERAL SUPERIOR GENERAL OF THE SOCIETY OF THE SISTERS OF ST. ANNE-CHENNAI ST. ANNE’S GENERALATE 37/39, MADHAVARAM, CHENNAI – 600060.
PRESENTLY, REV. SISTER JACQUELINE MARY SSAM, REPRESENTED BY HER ATTORNEY REV. SISTER MARGARET FATIMA MARY SSAM AGED 48 YEARS, VINAYA SADAN, ST. ANNE’S PROVINCIALATE SACRED HEART ROAD, T. C. PALYA, K. R. PURAM, BANGALORE – 560036.
... PETITIONER (BY MS. ANNA LUCIA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI RUPERT M ROSARIO, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION BANGALORE – 560001.
2. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE EAST TALUKA, BANGALORE – 560009.
3. THE ASSISTANT RVENUE OFFICER MAHADEVAPURA RANGE, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, KRISHNARAJAPURA, BENGALURU-560067.
4. SRI B. SELVARAJ, S/O LATE B. BALUSWAMY, REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER B. THOMAS, NO 8/53, 7TH CROSS, K. R. PURAM, BANGALORE – 560081.
5. SRI A. MARIYAPPA, S/O LATE ANNAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 6. SMT. LILLY MARY RANI WIFE OF A MARIYAPPA, BOTH 5 AND 6 R/AT BASAVANAPURA VILLAGE, VIRGONAGAR POST, BANGALORE – 560049.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R1 TO 3) …… THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2001 MADE BY THE R-1 IN R.A.12/2001-02 AT ANNEXURE-N. DIRECT THE R-2 TO RESTORE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH ALL DETAILS IN ALL THE RTC PAHANI FOR THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY FOR THE YEARS 1986 - 87 TO 2001-02 AS PER ANNEXURE-F.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking various reliefs; (a) the first prayer is to quash the order dated 13.11.2001 made by the first respondent in R.A.No.12/2001-02, as per Annexure-N. It is not in dispute that the said order is subject matter of revision in R.P.No.337/2009-10 pending on the file of the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru. Therefore, the first relief cannot be granted, since the petitioner has already approached the Deputy Commissioner and he is estopped from maintaining parallel proceedings.
2. The second prayer to issue a mandamus directing the second respondent to restore the name of the petitioner along with all details in all the RTC pahanis for the schedule property for the years 1986-87 to 2001- 02 as per Annexure-F and the following years upto date, will depend upon the order yet to be passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner in the pending Revision between the parties.
3. With regard to the third prayer to declare the sale deed dated 11.08.2006 as per Annexure-Q and gift deed dated 21.12.2015 as per Annexure-R1 as cancelled, it is for the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court seeking appropriate relief.
4. So far as the fourth prayer for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to cancel M.R.No.7/2001-02 entries at Annexures-O, M.R.No.H2/ 2015-16 as per Annexure-R2 and RTC pahani for the schedule property from the years 2001-02 and 2005-06, Annexures-P1 and P2 up to and including the years 2017-18 at Annexures-R3, again depends upon the result of the revision petition pending before the Special Deputy Commissioner.
5. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, it is suffice to direct the Special Deputy Commissioner to dispose of the Revision Petition No.337/2009-10, within a reasonable period.
6. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Special Deputy Commissioner to dispose of the Revision Petition No. 337/2009-10, strictly in accordance with law, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE kcm