Hanumakka W/O Late Bachanna v. State Of Karnataka By Its Secretary Revenue Department
2019-12-19
P.S.DINESH KUMAR
body2019
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : Heard Shri Ramachandra M.S., learned advocate for the petitioner and Shri Y.D.Harsha, learned AGA for the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure-K, a communication dated 15.10.2019 from the Tahasildar to the Deputy Commissioner submitting a proposal to take action to cancel the conversion of land measuring 3 acres 27 guntas in Survey Nos.21, 21/1 and 21/2. Shri. Ramachandra submitted that the proposal for cancellation submitted by the Tahasildar is made without notice to him. 3. Learned AGA submitted that petitioner has challenged an inter office communication between the Tahasildar and the Deputy Commissioner. No proceedings have been initiated against petitioner nor any order passed. Therefore, there is no cause of action for the petitioner to approach this Court. 4. Learned AGA is right in his submission that no order meeting petitioner with any civil consequences has been challenged in this writ petition. Hence, this petition is misconceived and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs.