ORDER The learned Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1 to 3. 2. The petitioner questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 22nd February, 2000 in proceedings No. MUN:5:99-2000 on the file of the 3rd respondent vide Annexure-J and the order dated 20th November, 2002 in proceedings No. PN:SPR:GG:CR:143:2002-03 on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-K presented the instant writ petition. 3. The deceased husband of the 5th respondent herein had filed an application for grant of land to the petitioner-Town Panchayat, Koppa in respect of property measuring 221x98+22/2 sq.ft. bearing Assessment No. 1118/84-85. The said request had been considered by the then Municipality which has now become Town Panchayat, Koppa and the same was granted by a resolution of the Council dated 30th April, 1962 for a sum of Rs. 1,770/- but, only a sum of Rs. 750/- was paid and remaining Rs. 1,020/- was not paid. In view of the non-payment of remaining amount with interest, an endorsement has been issued to the 5th respondent after the death of her husband dated 19th January, 1987 stating that inspite of giving notice to pay the balance amount with interest and the same having not been paid, the land granted under 1962 and 1982 decision shall stand cancelled and the said property will be vested with the petitioner-Panchayat. Against the said order passed by the Panchayat dated 19th January, 1987, the 5th respondent herein filed a suit on the file of Munsiff Court assailing the correctness of the decision taken by the petitioner-Panchayat. When the matter was pending adjudication before the Munsiff Court, the Panchayat took a decision on 20th December, 1988, resolving to effect Katha in favour of the 5th respondent subject to the condition the 5th respondent shall deposit a sum of Rs. 4,233/- with interest and thereafter, pursuant to the said resolution, the same has been forwarded to Zilla Panchayat, Chickmagalur for confirmation for issuing grant certificate in favour of 5th respondent subject to the condition that the 5th respondent shall withdraw the suit. After the withdrawal of the said suit, the 5th respondent has filed an application for grant of hakku pathra/grant certificate. After the withdrawal of the said suit, the 5th respondent has filed an application for grant of hakku pathra/grant certificate. Instead of considering her request, the matter was placed before the Council in its meeting held on 17th June, 1999 vide Annexure-H and took a decision not to consider her request on the question that the land in dispute is a valuable land and the same should be retained by the Town Panchayat only. Assailing the correctness of the resolution passed by the Council dated 17th June, 1999 vide Annexure-H, the 5th respondent herein has filed an appeal under Section 306 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 ('Act' for short) and the same was numbered as MUN/5/99-2000. The 3rd respondent after hearing both the side and after considering the records made available by the then officer of the petitioner-Panchayat has suspended the resolutions exercising powers under Section 306(2) of the Act and the same was forwarded to the 2nd respondent for consideration. The 2nd respondent in turn, after full evaluation of records in the light of decision taken by the 3rd respondent and other material available on the file has confirmed the suspension of resolution by its order dated 20-11-2002/30-11-2002 in proceedings No. PN/SPR/GG/CR/143/2002-03. Being aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the respondents 2 and 3, the petitioner felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. After careful perusal of the impugned orders vide Annexures-J and K on the file of respondents 2 and 3, respectively, it is manifest on the face of the orders that I do not find any error much less any material irregularity committed by the authorities. The authorities after conducting strict enquiry in compliance with the mandatory provisions of the Municipalities Act have rightly passed the orders suspending the resolution passed by the petitioner-Panchayat vide Annexure-H. The Town Panchayat, the petitioner herein instead of complying with the direction given by the Zilla Panchayat, wherein they have taken a decision for issue of Hakku Patra to the 5th respondent herein, the petitioner herein had passed a resolution cancelling the grant and the reason given for cancellation was that the property in question is very valuable and the same should be retained by the petitioner. The said decision was passed nearly after more than two decades without taking into consideration the grant already made in favour of late Yogendra Naik who is none other than the husband of the 5th respondent herein and further the petitioner-Panchayat instead of considering the request of 5th respondent for issue of hakku patra as held by the Competent Authorities as referred above, has once again placed the matter before the Council and has taken a decision to assail the correctness of the impugned orders vide Annexures-J and K in its meeting held on 30th December, 2002. After perusal of the impugned orders, the said decision taken by the Competent Authorities is just and reasonable. I do not find any grave error committed by the authorities for taking such a decision nor the petitioner-Panchayat has made out any good grounds to interfere with the well-considered orders passed by both the Competent Authorities i.e., respondents 2 and 3 herein. Further, it emerges from the material available on the records that instead of considering the request of the 5th respondent herein, the petitioner-Panchayat has dragged the 5th respondent from pillar to post one after another by change of circumstances and by passing resolutions thereby making the 5th respondent to withdraw the suit and again placing the matter before the Council to suit their convenience without taking into consideration the decision taken earlier by the Competent Authorities. Therefore, I am of the considered view that I do not find any material irregularity committed by the Competent Authority and interference by this Court is not justiciable. 5. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition filed by the petitioner-Panchayat is dismissed as one devoid of merits. 6. Sri H.M. Manjunath, learned Government Pleader is permitted to file his memo of appearance.