Writ appeals filed to set aside the Single Judge's order declining a writ petition challenging a land resurvey. The High Court dismissed the appeals, finding no justification to interfere as authorities were yet to consider pending objections before issuing a final report.
Writ appeals dismissed; no relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
W.A. Nos.5356-5358/2011 (KLR-RES)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO
W.A Nos.5356-5358/2011 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN :
SHIMOGA TALUK AND DIST-577 202. ...APPELLANTS
(By SRI. M R RAJAGOPAL & )
AND :
2
W.A. Nos.5356-5358/2011 (KLR-RES)
REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001
(By SRI. K. KRISHNA, AGA)
3
W.A. Nos.5356-5358/2011 (KLR-RES)
These Writ Appeals are filed under Section 4 of the High Courts Act, prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 09.06.2011 in W.P. Nos. 32327-32329/2009, Misc. W. No.2680/2011 and 3955/2011; consequently allow the writ petition and grant reliefs as prayed for in the writ petition.
These Appeals coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, N.KUMAR. J., delivered the following :
JUDGMENT
These appeals are filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge who has declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that on the basis of assumption and presumption nor on a hypothetical basis, writ of mandamus could not be issued. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are in appeal.
them have filed their objections for re-survey which is being conducted in pursuance of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Admittedly, the re-survey being necessitated because of the errors in the earlier survey as reflected in the Village Map. It is an inam village. Occupancy rights has been granted to various tenants. Even the Inamdars have been re-granted the lands. It is in this context to see that there is no overlapping and each person is
4
W.A. Nos.5356-5358/2011 (KLR-RES)
entitled to enjoy the property which is granted to him in accordance with law as the records available are not satisfactory and there are errors to re-survey ordered.
5
W.A. Nos.5356-5358/2011 (KLR-RES)
ignoring the objections filed, it is open to the petitioners to challenge the said final report and the notification to be issued in this regard. Even before their objections are considered and an order is passed they have rushed to the Court. Rightly the learned Single Judge has declined to interfere with the order.
passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, these Writ Appeals are dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE.
Sd/JUDGE.
Rbv.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court could issue a writ of mandamus to direct authorities to consider objections pending before them before conducting a resurvey.
Whether the Single Judge was correct in declining to interfere with the resurvey process based on mere apprehension.
SHRI.SUBRAMANYA IYER
SHRI CHANDRANAIKA
SRI LACHANIKA
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THE COMMISSIONER OF SURVEY & SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS
THE JOINT DIRECTOR (TECHNICAL) SURVEY SETTLEMENT & LAND RECORDS
N. KUMAR
V. SURI APPA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
