Karnataka High Court
Sri D M Shamanna vs The Chief Manager on 6 April, 2022
Author: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
WRIT PETITION No.18646 OF 2021 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
Sri. D.M. Shamanna
Aged about 66 years,
S/o. late Muniyappa,
R/o. Agrahara Village,
Kasaba Hobli,
Malur Taluk,
Kolar District - 563 130.
.. Petitioner
(By Sri. Nagaraja Reddy .D, Advocate)
AND:
The Chief Manager
M/s. Power Grid Corporation of India Limited,
(Govt., of India Enterprises)
Yelahanka 400 (GIS)/220KV(AIS)
Contraction Area Office at:
Near RTO Driving Test Track,
Singanayakanahalli Post,
Off Yelahanka - Doddaballapura Road,
Bangalore - 560 064.
.. Respondent
(By Sri. Joshua Hudson Samuel, Advocate)
****
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue writ of mandamus
W.P.No.18646/2021
2
directing the respondent to consider the representation dated
03-07-2021 produced at Annexure 'K' filed seeking to pay the
compensation amount with interest from the date of utilization
till realization and etc.,
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 'B'
Group, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing,
this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present petitioner has sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus, seeking a direction to the respondent to consider his representation dated 03-07-2021 (Annexure K) wherein he has sought to pay the compensation amount with interest from the date of the alleged utilisation till realisation.
2. The contention of the petitioner was that, his agricultural land was used by the respondent Company for drawing electricity lines, however, the compensation for which he was entitled to was not paid to him. It is in that regard, as per Annexure K, he had made a representation dated 03-07-2021 to the respondent, requesting them to pay the alleged remaining compensation amount of a sum of `4,95,000/- with accrued interest. W.P.No.18646/2021 3
2. The respondent entered appearance and filed their statement of objections contending that, they have already paid the substantial amount, the details of which also have been given by them in their statement of objections.
3. However, the learned counsels from both side today make a submission that during the pendency of this writ petition and after the respondent had filed their statement of objections, the petitioner has been paid with a sum of `5,00,000/- in the form of demand draft by the respondent Company.
4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the alleged interest has not been paid to him, however, concedes that his representation at Annexure K inter alia stands considered in one way or the other.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that in view of the consideration of the representation of the petitioner dated 03-07-2021, at Annexure K, the prayer made in the writ petition for issuance of a writ of W.P.No.18646/2021 4 mandamus does not survive, as such, the writ petition has become infructuous.
6. In the light of the above submission of the learned counsels for the parties, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent forum for his alleged claim towards interest, if any, the writ petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMV*