IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.53593 OF 2018 (LA-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri. H.M. Puttaraju, S/o late Mudligowda, Aged about 74 years, R/of Honnenahalli Village, Hiresave Hobli, Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan District – 573 116.
… Petitioner (By Sri. N. Praveen Kumar, Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, M. S. Building, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Veedhi, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Hassan District, Hassan – 573 201.
3. The Assistant Commissioner, Hassan Sub-Division, Hassan – 573 201.
4. The Tahsildar, Channarayapatna Taluk, Channarayapatna – 573 116.
(By Sri. E. S. Indiresh, AGA) … Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned orders dated 08.08.2001 passed by the R-3 bearing proceedings No.RA 49/2009-02 dated 30.09.2002 passed by the R-2 and order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru in appeal No.988/2002 dated 01.04.2005 vide Annexures-C, D and E respectively and etc This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. N. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. E. S. Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents to consider the representations dated 18.01.2014 and 23.04.2018 vide Annexures-F and G submitted by the petitioner.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representations dated 18.01.2014 and 23.04.2018 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submitted that the representations submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law, if not already decided.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioner, if not already decided, in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-