Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Akhila Bharata Kshatriya Mahasabha (R) on 10 June, 2022
Author: Ritu Raj Awasthi
Bench: Ritu Raj Awasthi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
REVIEW PETITION NO. 402/2021
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.49960/2017
BETWEEN:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.PRABHULING.K.NAVADGI, ADVOCATE GENERAL
A/W SRI.VIJAYAKUMAR.A.PATIL, AGA)
AND:
1. AKHILA BHARATA KSHATRIYA MAHASABHA(R)
NO 3350, K R ROAD
NEAR LG SERVICE CENTRE
BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU 560070
BY ITS PRESIDENT
SRI SRIDHAR RAJ URS
2. KARNATAKA RAJYA ARASU SANGHA (R)
ARASU SANGHA (R)
2
NO 265, LAKSHMI NIVAS
8TH MAIN ROAD, 1ST STAGE
BCC LAYOUT, BENGALURU 560040
BY ITS SECRETASRY
SRI NANDEESH G URS
3. MYSURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
MYSURU
BY ITS COMMISSIONER
4. JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA
J S S CIRCLE
MYSURU 570004
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
5. SRI SHIVARATRI RAJENDRA
SEVA TRUST
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
MEGHANA, TN PURA ROAD
NANDANAHALLI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU 570028
6. PROF P V NANJARAJA URS
RETIRED PROFESSOR
UNIVERSITY OF MYSURU
NO 16, 19TH BLOCK
SBM COLONY, SRIRAMAPURA
2ND PHASE, MYSURU 570023
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MAHESHA P, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED;
SRI.MOHAN BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI.BASAVARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5;
SRI.N.P.AMRUTHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R6)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE
1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CPC, 1908,
3
PRAYING TO A). REVIEW/MODIFY THE ORDER DATED:
07.09.2021 PASSED BY HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT
PETITION NO.49960/2017 (ANNEXURE-A) BY PERMITTING
THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO REFER THE MATTER
RELATING TO THE INSTALLATION OF THE STATUE TO THE
COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT
VIDE CIRCULAR DATED: 23.12.2019 FOR APPROPRIATE
DECISION AND PERMIT THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO
TAKE DECISION THEREAFTER, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND B). GRANT SUCH OTHER
RELIEF OR RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT
TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned review petition is filed by the State seeking review of the order dated 7.9.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No.49960/2017.
2. The learned Advocate General reiterating the grounds urged in the review petition would submit that the order under review suffers from error apparent on the face of the records. He would point out that this Court has proceeded on an assumption that the proposed installation of statue is an 4 unauthorised construction and it is in this background, this Court was of the view that the State Government cannot grant any permission for construction of any structure in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places. He would further contend that pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court issued on 18.01.2013 in SLP.No.8519/2006, the State Government has issued a Circular on 23.12.2019 for removal of unauthorised constructions. The State has constituted a District Level Committees to review the position and obtain the factual matrix at the ground level in every district.
3. It is in this background, the learned Advocate General would try to impress upon us and persuade this Court to review the order under challenge only to the extent of issuing a direction to the State Government or to the Committee constituted by the State Government. He would point 5 out that the District Committee comprising of competent authorities are better placed to ascertain the factual matrix in the light of the directions issued by the Apex Court. He would further contend that the controversy as to whether Gun House Circle is on the road or whether the said Circle and platform of the said circle is in existence much prior to the directions issued by the Apex Court is a disputed question of fact and it can be ascertained only by way of a spot inspection. The District Committee is constituted to assess and examine as to whether the proposed installation of statue would affect the movement of the vehicles as observed by the Apex Court. He would conclude his arguments by contending that the State Government, to honour the service rendered by His Holiness Dr. Shri Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamy, who has contributed immensely to the culture, religion and health service to the citizens of the entire Mysuru 6 region and surrounding districts, has proposed to accord permission to install the statue at Gun House Circle which would in no way affect the movement of traffic.
4. The counsel appearing for respondent No.3 arguing in the same vein would also contend that the matter needs to be referred to the District Committee since the State and Local Authorities have taken a specific stand that the Gun House Circle is in existence much prior to the directions issued by the Apex Court and the Circle has also platform in the center and all these disputed question of facts have to be ascertained by the District Level Committee and therefore, he would support the grounds urged by the review petitioner in this petition.
5. Per contra, the counsel appearing for the contesting respondents 1 and 2 would however 7 support the reasons assigned by this Court and would contend that the order under challenge does not suffer from any illegality and the grounds urged in the review petition does not satisfy the ingredients of Order XLVII of CPC indicating any error apparent on face of the record. In the alternate, he would contend that in the event, this Court comes to the conclusion that the matter needs to be referred to the District Committee, then the contesting respondents 1 and 2 have to be heard in the matter.
6. Heard the learned Advocate General, counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and counsel for respondent No.3.
7. The writ petition came to be filed in the nature of public interest litigation. The petitioners in the writ petition questioned the Government Order dated 3.3.2017 not on the ground that it violates the 8 Supreme Court directions issued to the concerned Deputy Commissioner to deal with unauthorised constructions, but on the ground that the installation of bust of the seer at the entrance of Mysuru would not serve any useful purpose. On the contrary, the petitioners in the writ petition claimed that as a tribute to the last prince of Yadu Dynasty of Mysuru, it would be better to install the bust of Shri Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar. Therefore, what emerges from the records is that the petitioners have filed the writ petition under the garb of public interest litigation. Though, the petitioners in the writ petition have contended that the bust of Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamy, cannot be installed in a public place and the Mysuru Mahanagara Palika is not authorised to install any bust in any public place, in the alternate, have sought to install the bust of Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar.
9
8. Be that as it may, as pointed out by the learned Advocate General, the Government has constituted a District Level Committee to review the disputed public places. The question as to whether the existing Gun House Circle is on the road or whether the said Circle and platform attached to it pre- existed the orders of the Apex Court needs to be examined by the District Level Committee. The question as to whether the proposed installation of bust of Shri Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamy. is permissible and further it leads to encroachment of public place has to be reviewed by the District Level Committee. It is in this background, we are inclined to interfere with the order under challenge. If the Government has already constituted a District Level Committee we would deem it fit to leave to the concerned Competent Authorities to take appropriate measures and find out whether the proposed 10 installation of bust is permissible in terms of the directions of the Apex Court. The learned Advocate General has tried to impress upon the Court that the installation of the bust is not on the unauthorised public place which violates the directions of the Apex Court.
9. In order to ensure strict compliance of the directions issued by the Apex Court, the District Level Committee shall look into the proposal and ensure that the directions issued by the Apex Court are not violated. While examining the claim of the State Government in regard to installation of bust of Shri Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamy, the Committee shall afford reasonable opportunity to respondents 1 and 2. It is open for respondents 1 and 2 to place all relevant materials in support of their contention. 11 For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following ORDER The review petition is allowed. The District Level Committee shall examine the proposal of the State Government to install the bust of Shri Shivarathri Rajendra Mahaswamy at Gun House Circle. The District Level Committee shall strictly adhere to the directions issued by the Apex Court in SLP.No.8519/2006 and take appropriate measures strictly in terms of the directions issued by the Apex Court in the judgment cited supra.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE *alb/-