IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.491/2019 (KLR-LG) BETWEEN :
Sri Shamanna Prabhu S/o late Govinda Prabhu Aged about 69 years Residing at Idya House Odilnala Village Belthangady Taluk D.K.District-574 217.
(By Sri Rakshith Kumar, Advocate) AND :
1. State of Karnataka Department of Revenue M.S.Building, Ambedkar Veedhi Bengaluru-560 001 Represented by its Secretary.
2. The Deputy Commissioner State Bank Road, Mangaluru, D.K. District-575 001.
3. The Assistant Commissioner Puttur Sub-Division Puttur Taluk, D.K. District-574 201.
… Petitioner 4. The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Belthangady Taluk D.K. District-574 214.
5. Range Forest Officer Belthangady Range Belthangady Taluk D.K. District-574 214.
(By Sri Venkatesh Dodderi, AGA) … Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 11.08.2018 passed by Respondent No.3 vide Annexure-A consequently to quash the order dated 31.08.2004 passed by the Respondent No.3 vide Annexure-D and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R Petitioner herein is impugning the order of the third respondent in proceedings No.ADiS.R.E.V.S.R.251/2014- 15, dated 11.8.2018 on the file of the Assistant Commissioner, Puttur Sub-Division in appeal filed by the petitioner herein challenging the order dated 31.8.2004 and seeking review of the very same order of the third respondent.
2. Admittedly, the said order was subject matter of challenge before the very same Officer as stated by the petitioner in CDis.LND(4)131/03-04 which was disposed of on 31.8.2004 in favour of the appellants, namely Range Forest Officer and Tahsildar of Belthangadi. The records would further indicate that the order of the Assistant Commissioner was subject matter of challenge in an appeal registered in C.Dis.RAP.145/11-12, on the file of the Deputy Commissioner, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru where by an order dated 1.2.2013, the order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 31.8.2004 was confirmed. Thereafter, the petitioner herein sought for review of the order of the Assistant Commissioner after the same has been confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner which is not permissible. Accordingly, the third respondent-Assistant Commissioner has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for review which appears to be just and proper. Therefore, question of interfering with the same, in this writ petition does not arise.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Learned AGA to file memo of appearance for all the respondents within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE *ck/-