Smt. Sannamma vs The Deputy Commissioner and Others

K.L. Manjunath, J.—The legality and correctness of the findings in the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Pandavapura Sub-Division, Pandavapura, Mandya District dated 26.09.2003, in case No. RA-97/2002-03, which has been confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner in R.A. No. 35/2003 dated 31.01.2011, was questioned by the appellant by filing a writ petition before the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 9710-11/2011 (KLR-RR/SUR), dated 08.06.2011. The writ petition has been rejected by confirming the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner. Therefore the present appeal is filed.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and Government Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 4.

The appellant herein made an application for regularization of 30 guntas of land in survey no. 28, of Yaladahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Nagamangala Taluk, Mandya District, on the ground that the appellant has been under unauthorized cultivation of the Government land. The committee constituted for regularization of the unauthorized cultivation regularised the same in favour of the appellant.

The respondent nos. 5 to 18 who are villagers filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Pandavapura Sub-division, Pandavapura, challenging the orders of the committee, contending that the appellant was not an unauthorizedly cultivating the lands and that the land is goondu thoppu, used by all the villagers which could not be granted in favour of the respondent; It was also contended that the goondu thoppu is being used by all the villagers by using the same as manure pit and store the manure. Therefore, they requested the Assistant Commissioner to set-aside the order of regularization of unauthorized occupation.

The Assistant Commissioner after hearing the parties and came to the conclusion that the committee was required to look into the extent of land in possession of the appellant by making spot inspection. Accordingly, he directed the Tahsildhar who is the Secretary of the Committee constituted for regularization of unauthorized cultivation to make a spot inspection and to submit a detailed report to the committee and further directed the committee to consider the cases of the parties on merits and dispose of the cases in accordance with law. Accordingly, he remanded the matter to the committee constituted for regularisation of unauthorized cultivation.

Aggrieved by the order of Assistant Commissioner, the appellant filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, which appeal has been dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner, by confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed the writ petition before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. Therefore, the present appeal is filed.

Having heard the counsel for the parties; we are of the view that no error is committed by the Assistant Commissioner in order to interfere with the same. He has only directed the Secretary of the Committee to make a spot inspection and find out the actual extent of land in unauthorized occupation of the appellant and also to find out whether it is a goondu thoppu kept for the utility of the villagers and used by the villagers to stock the cow-dung and manure pit.

In such circumstances, if the Assistant Commissioner has passed an order, this Court cannot find fault with the order of the Assistant Commissioner as well as the order of the Deputy Commissioner and learned Single Judge. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The Tahsildar is directed to inspect the spot and submit the report to the committee as directed by the Assistant commissioner. These appeals are dismissed accordingly.