—1 — IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 30th day of June, 1998 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R V RAVEENDRN nNo34 1993 tween: Thibba lab sb Mallalanhana Thibba Dalaiah h r/o Talagawadi Kirugaval hobli Malavalli taluic - PETITIONER [8y Sri M S Purushothama Rao, Adv] 1. State of karnataka by its Secretary Deptt of Rural Development & Panchayat Raj, Govt Secretariat, Bangalore 2. Zilla Panchayat Mandya district Mandya, by its Chief Executive Officer 3, Dugganahalli Mandal Panchayat, Dugganahalli Kirigaval hobli Malavalli taluk by its Secretary 4. 8 M Shivaprakash Deputy Secretary( I) Zilla Panchayat Mandya 5. Shivalingaiah sb Lingaiah Doddaputtegowda -2 6. 0 Daliah Nindana Mogaiah R-5 and 6 are rio Talagawadi Kriugaval Hobli Malavalli taluk 7. Kalaiah, major Pradhan, Mandal Panchayat, Duanahal ii Kirigaval hobli Malavalli taluk ... 1ESP0NDENTS [Sri A Nagarajappa, AGA, for Ri; Sri 8 3 Sornayaji, Adv. for R2; Sri M Sivappa, Adv, for R5 & R6; R3, R4 & R7 served) Writ Petition is filed praying to quash Annexure ‘C’ dated 22-7—1993 passed in Appeal No 76/90-91 on the file of the third respondent and etc. This writ petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following: Petitioner filed an appeal under Section 273 of Karnataka Zilla Parishad, Mandal Panchayst and Nyaya Samithis Act, 1983, against the order of the third respondent, transferring the khata in regard to property bearing Sy No 377 of Talagawadi, Malavalli taluk, before the second respondent when the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 came into force on 10—5—1993, he made an application to transfer the appeal to the Asst. Commissioner on the ground that Zilla Parisahd/Zilla Panchayat was no longer the appellate authority. In reply, the second respondent issued an endorsement dated 22—7—1993 [Annexure ‘C’) stating that by virtue of the Government Notification dated 10—5—1993, the case fell within the jurisdiction of the Zilla Panchayat and will continue on the file of the fourth respondent and therefore it was not possible to transfer the appeal to the Asst Commissioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this petition for quashing Annexure ‘C’ dated 22—7-1993 and a declaration that Notification dated 10-5-1993 does not refer to appellate and quasi-judicial powers and seeking a direction to third respondent to transfer the appeal to the Asst Commissioner, Mandya Subdivision. 2. When the matter came up today, the learned counsel agreed that the matter is covered by the decision of this court in KEMPAMMA vs ZILLA PANCHAYAT MANDYA (WP No 37363-64 of 1993, decided on 24—6-1998] Hence, following the said decision, this petition is dismissed. Sd,’ *pjk T GE