Budde Sab vs The Deputy Commissioner

Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J.—Petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation filed by him as per Annexure-D, dated 30-5-2013 praying for regularisation of unauthorised cultivation of the land bearing Sy. No. 15 to an extent of 4 acres out of total extent of 41 acres 33 guntas of Rajankollur Village, Surpur Taluk, Yadgir District. It seems that the petitioner filed application for grant of land/regularisation of his occupation over the land bearing Sy. No. 108/1 to an extent of 4 acres situated at Rajankollur Village, Surpur Taluk as per Annexure-A in the year 1999; the authorities having found that the petitioner was not cultivating the property bearing Sy. No. 108/1 and as the said property was cultivated by some other persons seem to have rejected the application filed by the petitioner as is clear from documents at Annexures-B and C, dated 28-1-2003. After about 10 years, petitioner is stated to have filed representation as per Annexure-D, dated 30-5-2013 praying for regularisation of his unauthorised occupation of the land over Sy. No. 15 to an extent of 4 acres.

According to the petitioner, he had wrongly shown survey number of the land as Sy. No. 108/1 instead of Sy. No. 15 of Rajankollur Village and therefore, he has made representation as per Annexure-D, dated 30-5-2013 praying for regularisation of unauthorised occupation. There is nothing on record to show as to whether Annexure-D was really filed by the petitioner or not. There is no endorsement by the respondents for having received the said representation. Representation bears certain thumb impression which is stated to be that of the petitioner. In this context, the learned Government Pleader is justified in arguing that the said representation is created only to file this writ petition.

Be that as it may, if the law permits the petitioner to make one more application seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation of the land, it is open for him to make such application in accordance with law. If the said application is filed, the same shall be considered by the respondents as per law and on merits. This Court makes it clear that the application filed by the petitioner shall be considered only if such application is permissible in law. This order shall not be meant that this Court has directed the respondents to consider the representation filed by the petitioner in one way or the other; but the application has to be considered strictly in accordance with law and on merits.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.