M.NAGAPRASANNA,J. - (1.)The Review Petitioners are before this Court seeking review of a judgment dtd. 4/2/2020 passed in Writ Appeal No.2509 of 2015 whereby the Division Bench rejects the appeal, affirming the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
(2.)Heard Sri M R Rajagopal, learned senior counsel for petitioners, Sri Jeevan J Neeralgi, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri B.S.Sachin, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3.
(3.)Facts in brief, germane are as follows: A learned single Judge in Writ Petition Nos.18139-18141 of 2011 and connected cases had passed certain order on 04 -03-2013 allowing the petitions, filed by the present petitioners, in part. This was called in question before the Division Bench in Writ Appeal Nos.2823-2825 of 2013 and connected cases. The Division Bench, on the submission of the learned counsel representing the appellants therein that the appellants would want to prefer a review petition, dismissed the writ appeals as withdrawn, in terms of its order dated 05 -01-2015. A Review Petition was preferred before the learned single Judge, in Review Petition No.125 of 2015 and connected cases. The Review petitions were rejected. Calling in question both the orders passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petitions 18139-18141 of 2011 and the order in review, the present petitioners prefer a writ appeal, in Writ Appeal No.2509 of 2015. The Division Bench, by a detailed judgment, notices the fact that the order of the learned Single Judge was based upon a report of the Commissioner appointed by the Court, with a direction to conduct inspection of the property and submit a report. The report of the Commissioner was that Sy.No.153/1 was the only land, that was entitled to be dropped from the acquisition by de-notifying the same. Insofar as other survey numbers were concerned i.e., Sy.Nos.156/2 and 156/3 the report was against the petitioners. The Division Bench considering the report in detail, rejects all the contentions of the appellants therein - the review petitioners.