J R RAGHUNATH Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, represented by his legal representatives, questioning the impugned order dated 8th January, 2001 bearing No, Purasabhe (1) CR 143, 161/99-2000 on the file of the first respondent vide Annexure-J, only insofar as it relates to cancellation of resolution No. 13 (4), dated 26th March, 1998 passed by second respondent-Town Panchayat, have presented the instant writ petition.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner, now represented by his legal representatives is that, he was the senior and law abiding citizen and was in lawful possession and enjoyment of the house property bearing Municipal Assessment No. 1187/1301/1366 of Halesanthe Maidhan, Molakalmuru town, Chitradurga District, having purchased the same from Molakalmuru Municipality in the years 1974 and 1978, wherein he has constructed a house measuring an extent of 82 ft. East to west and 19 ft. North to South, leaving 3 ft. x 84 ft. vacant, towards the northern side of the property for the purpose of ventilation and passing of rain water etc. The said house has been constructed after obtaining necessary licence from the municipality and he has paid the necessary kandaya in respect of the said property and all the records stand in the name of petitioner. When things stood thus, towards the eastern side of the property of the deceased petitioner, there is a vacant site belonging to the Municipality. The petitioner for the purpose of construction of a compound wall around his house applied to the Municipality in respect of an extent of 15 ft. North to South and 5 1/2 ft. East to West towards the eastern side of the house. The second respondent, after considering his genuine request, has placed the matter before the committee of the Town Panchayat. The Committee in its meeting held on 26th March, 1998 passed a resolution unanimously deciding to grant the said bit of land, after collecting necessary cost towards the said bit of land. The second respondent has issued the possession certificate on 15th June, 1998 vide Annexure-B. Thereafter, again, he has filed another application for grant of 4 ft. towards East to West and 10 ft. towards North to South which is situate at East-South side of the house property. The Municipality in its meeting held on 9th July, 1999 decided to grant the said bit of land also through a sale certificate dated 3rd June, 2000 in respect of only 9 ft. x 4 ft. vide Annexures-C and D respectively. When petitioner has taken up the construction of compound wall around his house, respondents 3 and 4 being owners of site bearing assessment no. 1186/1300/a and No. 1186/1300 respectively situate adjacent to the property belonging to the petitioner towards the northern side, filed two appeals before the first respondent in Appeal nos. 143 of 1999 and 161 of 1999, being aggrieved by the two resolutions passed by second respondent dated 26th March, 1998 and dated 9th July, 1999 vide Annexures-A and C respectively. The first respondent, without conducting proper enquiry and without going through the contents of the resolutions, the ground reality and without giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, has proceeded to pass the order as if it is the Appellate Authority, cancelling the resolution passed by second respondent. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 8th january, 2001 vide Annexure-J insofar as it relate to cancellation of resolution No. 13 (4), dated 26th March, 1998 passed by second respondent, deceased petitioner felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioner, now represented by his legal representatives and learned Counsel appearing for respondents.