K. Nagaraju vs Kenchappa

A.N. Venugopal Gowda, J.—Heard learned Advocates on both sides and perused the writ record.

For the second time, the petitioner is before this Court. W.P. No. 72207/2012 filed against an order dated 30.7.2012, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bellary, in Appeal No. 40/2012-13 was allowed and the impugned order in the writ petition was set aside. Since the petitioner had been dispossessed from the property during the pendency of the said writ petition, it was directed that the petitioner shall be restored to his original position with regard to the possession of the property, subject to the result of the Appeal No. 40/2012-13 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner, Bellary. It was made clear that the interim order of stay granted by the Deputy Commissioner, on 30.7.2012, shall operate till the appeal is decided by the Deputy Commissioner.

The said order was passed on 12.6.2013. The Deputy Commissioner, had the obligation to decide the appeal by granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to both sides in the said appeal. Instead, without conducting any proceedings by granting reasonable opportunity of hearing the parties, the Deputy Commissioner has passed the impugned order on 18.9.2013. Failure to conduct the proceedings in accordance with law is apparent from the order sheet of the Appellate Authority-Deputy Commissioner, vide Annexure-G. The impugned order is liable to be quashed on account of not following the principles of natural justice and also the observations and directions issued in the order passed on 12.6.2013 in W.P. No. 72207/2012.

In the result, writ petition is allowed and the impugned order as at Annexure-H is quashed. Consequently, Appeal No. 40/2012-13 stands restored to the file of respondent No. 7, for decision in accordance with the directions issued in the order passed on 12.6.2013 in W.P. No. 72207/2012.

Since the petitioner has been dispossessed after passing of the impugned order, vide

Annexure-H, which is wholly illegal, the petitioner shall be restored to his original position, with regard to the possession of the property, as was prevailing earlier to the passing of the impugned order by the 7th respondent, which will be subject to the result of Appeal No. 40/2012-13, which is required to be decided by the Deputy Commissioner in accordance with law and by keeping in view the observations made supra.

Both the parties shall appear before the 7th respondent on 30.6.2014 at 03.00 p.m. and receive further orders. Respondent No. 7 shall take immediate measures to restore possession of the property in question to the petitioner, on or before 5.7.2014 and decide the appeal thereafter, within a period of two months from the date the possession of the property in question is restored to the petitioner.

All the contentions of both the sides are left open.

It is needless to observe that both sides/the parties to the appeal, shall render necessary cooperation to the respondent No. 7 to decide the appeal within the said period.