Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 561 (KAR)

P. M. Shankar v. State of Karnataka

2014-06-04

B.V.NAGARATHNA

body2014
ORDER : B.V. Nagarathna, J. 1. Petitioners are seeking a direction to consider their representation dated 11-3-2013 (Annexure-A) so as to conduct podi and durasth work and assigning of a new survey number in respect of land bearing Survey No. 35/P13, measuring 2 acres at Dasanayakanahalli, Jala Hobli, Bengalooru North Taluk, Bengalooru. Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioners have purchased the aforesaid land under two registered sale deeds dated 28-6-2006 from their vendor one Smt. Anil Sankey. Subsequently, proceedings were initiated under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 against the petitioners' vendor, in which proceedings, the petitioners had impleaded themselves. By order dated 25-2-2013, the 3rd respondent-the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore held that the records in respect of the said lands purchased by the petitioners were in order and dropped the proceedings. A direction was also given to conduct podi and assign new survey numbers in terms of the Government Circulars dated 1-10-2009 and 28-9-2012 and to update the entries in the revenue records. Thereafter, the petitioners made a representation for compliance of the said direction of the 3rd respondent. The grievance of the petitioners is that the order has not been implemented till date and hence, they have sought a direction to consider their representation, which is at Annexure-A. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA who appears for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. At the out set, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners do not press Prayer 'A' and that only a direction to consider the representation dated 11-3-2013 may be granted. Having regard to the fact that the order of the Special Deputy Commissioner is dated 25-2-2013 and till date, no steps have been initiated to comply with the direction therein and neither the representation made by the petitioners have been considered, this is a fit case where a direction should ensue to the respondents and particularly the 5th respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioners in light of the order of the Special Deputy Commissioner dated 25-2-2013 and to complete the podi work and assign new survey numbers in accordance with law within a period of five months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed.