Vandana Srinivas vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 4741 Kant

                            -1-



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                        PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

                           AND

   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

           WRIT APPEAL NO. 40 OF 2022 (LR)

BETWEEN:

1 . SMT. VANDANA SRINIVAS
    W/O. SRINIVAS
    AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
    NOW RESIDING AT NO. 1631/4
    "SRUTI", 1ST FLOOR, 1STCROSS
    RAMAMOHANAPURAM
    DEVAIAH PARK
    BENGALURU - 560 021.

2 . SMT. LAKSHMISWATHI
    W/O SURENDRA REDDY
    AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
    RESIDING AT GINIGERE VILLAGE
    KOPPA TALUK AND DISTRICT.

3 . SRI SURENDRA REDDY
    S/O ANJIREDDY
    AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
    RESIDING AT GINIGERE VILLAGE
    KOPPA TALUK AND DISTRICT.

4 . SRI A. SRINIVAS MURTHY
    S/O A.S. ACHAR
    AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
    RESIDING AT NO.49/2
    4TH MAIN ROAD 16TH CROSS
    MALLESHWARAM
    BENGALURU - 560 003.
                                       ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI PRITHVEESH M K., ADVOCATE)
                             -2-




AND:


1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
    BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
    REVENUE DEPARTMENT
    M S BUILDING
    BENGALURU - 560 001.

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
    BENGALURU CITY
    BENGALURU - 560 009.

3 . THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY
    COMMISSIONER
    BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT
    BENGALURU - 560 009.

4 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
    BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION
    BENGALURU - 560 001.

5 . THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
    KRISHNARAJAPURAM
    BENGALURU EAST TALUK
    BENGALURU - 560 036.

                                         ... RESPONDENTS


(BY SRI H.R.SHOWRI., AGA)
                              ---

       THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2021 PASSED IN BY LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WP NO 908/2021 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE
SAID WP NO.908/2021L AS PRAYED FOR BY THE APPELLANTS.


       THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCING    THIS   DAY,     S.R.KRISHNA   KUMAR     J.
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                               -3-




                         JUDGMENT

This appeal by the writ petitioners in

W.P.No.908/2021 is directed against the impugned order

dated 25.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge,

whereby the said petition filed by the appellants seeking a

direction to the respondents-State to remove the name of

the Government in the revenue records pertaining to the

subject land by considering the appellants' representation

at Annexure-B dated 23.09.2020 was dismissed by the

learned Single Judge.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

learned Additional Government Advocate for the

respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record would

indicate that the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru

(for short 'the Tribunal') in appeal No.1146/2013 clubbed

with Appeal No.880/2012 dated 23.08.2019 produced as

Annexure-A to the writ petition has upheld the claim of the

appellants with regard to the subject land and has set aside

the order dated 08.08.2012 passed by the Assistant

Commissioner, Bengaluru and the order dated 14.02.2013

passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District.

4. It is the grievance of the appellants that despite

the aforesaid order passed by the Tribunal and the

appellants submitting a representation dated 23.09.2020

requesting the respondents to comply with and give effect

to the order passed by the Tribunal, they did not take any

steps or pass any orders on the same and as such, the

petitioners preferred the aforesaid writ petition before the

learned Single Judge.

5. It is submitted that despite the aforesaid order

passed by the Tribunal having attained finality and become

conclusive and binding upon the respondents, learned

Single Judge has failed to consider and appreciate these

undisputed factual aspects thereby culminating in the

erroneous impugned order, aggrieved by which, the

appellants are before this Court by way of the present

appeal.

6. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the

appellants, the material on record clearly discloses that the

aforesaid order dated 23.08.2019 passed by the Tribunal

has attained finality and become conclusive and binding

upon the appellants as well as the respondents and

consequently, the respondents were duty bound to consider

the representation of the appellants and pass appropriate

orders/take appropriate decision in the light of the aforesaid

order passed by the Tribunal. It is therefore clear that the

impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is

erroneous and contrary to the material on record

warranting interference by this Court in the present appeal.

7. In the result, we pass the following:

ORDER

i) Writ appeal is hereby allowed.

ii) The impugned order dated 25.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge is hereby set aside.

iii) The respondents are directed to address the grievance of the appellants and consider and pass appropriate orders/take appropriate decision on the aforesaid representation of the appellants dated 23.09.2020 in accordance with law bearing in mind the aforesaid order dated 23.08.2019 passed by the Tribunal within

a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The pending interlocutory applications stand disposed of.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

VM