Further, in view of sub section 1 of Sec.44 of Act numberwithstanding the order of the Special Deputy Commissioner, Act of 1/74 has companye into force, it is a tenanted land and therefore it will statutorily vests with the State Government.
The dispute relates to applicability of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 in short the Act in the background of Mysore Personal and Miscellaneous Inam Abolition Act, 1954 in short Inam Act as amended by the Karnataka Inams Abolition Laws Amendment Act, 1979 in short Amendment Act .
In my companysidered view, numbere of the companytentions urged in this petition warrant interference with the impugned order for the reason that, the order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner under the Act of 1954 does number bind third respondent as he was number party to the proceedings.
Appellant had filed the writ petition number32930 of 1996 which was disposed of by orders dated August 4, 2000 and August 24, 2000.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
1867 2008 Arising out of S.L.P. C No.25804 of 2004 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the order of the Division Bench of the of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the writ appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act.
Challenge in the writ appeal was to the order passed by a learned Single Judge.
