IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN WRIT PETITION NO.50980 OF 2019 (SC/ST) BETWEEN:
1. SRI V.M. VENKATESH S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 2. SRI V.M. MURALIKRISHNA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 3. SRI V.M. RAMESH BABU S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 4. SRI V.M. GANESH S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT UPAKUNTE VILLAGE, SUGATUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT – 563 102.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI VENUGOPAL M.S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR – 563 101.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR – 563 101.
4. THE THASILDAR KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR – 563 101.
5. THE TALUK PANCHAYATH KOLAR – 563 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
(BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, HCGP FOR R1-R4) … RESPONDENTS * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R3 DATED 09-01-2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE R4 TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER TO DELETE THE ENTRY MADE IN RECORD OF RIGHTS IN COLUMN No.11 IN RESPECT OF LAND BEARING SY.No.76 (NEW SY.No.118) OF UPAKUNTE VILLAGE, SAGATUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK, AS PER ANNEXURE-M AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This petition is filed by the petitioners who are the LRs of the grantee for issuing writ of certiorari quashing the order passed by respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner dated 09.01.20919 vide Annexure-A and also for a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.4 to pass appropriate order to delete the entry made in the Record of Rights in column No.11 in respect of land bearing Survey No.76 (new Survey No.118) of Upakunte Village, Sagatur Hobli, Kolar Taluk vide Annexure-M.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. Learned HCGP has raised preliminary objection contending that the order passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-A is based upon the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner vide Annexure-G dated 19.07.2018. The said order has already been challenged before this Court by the petitioner by filing Writ Petition No.41463/2018, which is pending before this Court.
4. The order as per Annexure-A passed by the Assistant Commissioner is only based upon the order as per Annexure-G, which is already challenged before this Court in the above said writ petition.
5. Such being the case, one more petition for challenging the same order does not arise. The name of the petitioner has been deleted in the RTC based upon the order at Annexure-G. That itself is not a ground for filing another writ petition before this Court, when already a writ petition No.41463/2018 is pending before this Court for consideration.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that liberty may be reserved to file an appeal against the order of the Assistant Commissioner which is in the pending consideration in the aforesaid writ petition.
7. The prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners seeking liberty to file an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner cannot be considered in view of the writ petition No.41463/2018 pending before this Court.
Hence, petition is dismissed as not-maintainable.
Sd/- JUDGE GBB