Karnataka High Court
Smt. Kumari vs State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION No.60429/2016 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. KUMARI
W/O SRI YOGANNA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
2. SMT SUKANYA
W/O SRI ANAND KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
3. SMT GOWRAMMA
W/O SRI DHARNENDA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
4. SMT MANJULA
W/O SRI BASAVALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
5. SRI RUDRAMANI
W/O SRI DHARNENDRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
2
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
6. SMT LAKSHMI
W/O SRI DHARMA PRAKASH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
7. SMT MALLAMMA
W/O SRI NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
8. SRI THOJAKSHI
W/O SRI KEMPA NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
9. SMT KALYANAMMA
W/O SRI SOMARAJU
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT MALLENAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
10 . SMT NAGARATHNAMMA
W/O SRI NARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT MALLENAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
11 . SMT HEMAVATHI
W/O SURESH
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT MALLENAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
12 . SMT SHANTHA
W/O SRI ANNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
3
R/AT NAYAKANAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
13 . SMT SHARADHA
W/O SRI THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NAYAKANAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
14 . SMT NAGARATHNAMMA
W/O SRI HALAGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
15 . SMT ASHA
W/O SRI DOREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT NAYAKANAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
16 . SMT PARVATHI
W/O SRI SHANTHAKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
17 . SMT VISHALAKSHMAMMA
W/O SRI SHAMBULINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
18 . SMT RANGAMMA
W/O SRI THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT MUKUNDUR
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
19 . SMT THANGAMMA
W/O SRI MALLIK
4
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT MUKUNDUR
KARLE, HASSAN
20 . SMT LAKSHMI
W/O SRI VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT MUKUNDUR
KARLE, HASSAN
21 . SMT LINGARAJAMMA
W/O SRI NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE, HASSAN
22 . SMT RATHNAMMA
W/O SRI RAVIKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT MUKUNDUR
KARLE, HASSAN
23 . SMT GOWRAMMA
W/O SRI JAYANNA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT MALLENAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
24 . SMT KOMAL K A
W/O SRI HANUMANTHEGOWDA
R/AT MALLENAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
25 . SMT. PUTTAMMA
W/O SRI BASAVARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAM
HASSAN.
26 . SMT. SHANTHAMMA
5
W/O SRI BASAVARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN.
27 . SMT. KOMAL
W/O SRI LINGARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN.
28 . SMT. SHIVALALITHA
W/O SRI.SHIVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
29 . SMT. RUDRAMMA
W/O SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
30 . SMT. HARDHAMMA
W/O SRI. SHIVANNA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
31 . SMT. PARVATHI
W/O SRI. RUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
6
32 . SMT. RANI
W/O SRI. MAHADEV,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN
33 . SMT. RANI
W/O SRI.CHANDRASHEKHAR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
34 . SMT SHIVAMMA
W/O SRI RAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/A M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
35 . SMT KATTALAMMA
W/O SRI CHENNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/A M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
36 . SMT PRAMILA
W/O SRI MALLESH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/A MUKUNDAR
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
37 . SMT SUSHILAMMA
W/O SRI GUNDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/A MALLENAHALLI
KALRE GRAMA
HASSAN
7
38 . SMT MANJULA
W/O SRI DHARMA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
39 . SMT PARVATHAMMA
W/O SRI DUBAISHETTY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/A M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
40 . SMT PADMAMMA
W/O SRI JAVRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
41 . SMT MANI
W/O SRI CHANDRASHEKHAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
42 . SMT GOWRAMMA
W/O SRI VEERABHADRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
43 . SMT SAVITHRI
W/O SRI LOKESH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
8
44 . SMT PUTTAMMA
W/O SRI SANNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
45 . SMT JAYAMMA
W/O SRI RANGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT M HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA
HASSAN
46 . SMT.SAROJAMMA
W/O SRI SANJEEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN.
47 . SMT.CHENNAROY
W/O SRI BELLARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN.
48 . SMT.GANGAMMA
W/O SRI.SANNAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,HASSAN.
49 . SMT.JAYAMMA
W/O SRI CHIKKAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN.
50 . SMT.JANAKI
W/O SRI RAVI,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
9
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN.
51 . SMT.SIDDAMMA
W/O SRI MALLESH,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT M.HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA, HASSAN.
52 . SMT. JANAKI
W/O. SRI. NAGARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
53 . SMT. PUTTAMMA
W/O. SRI. RAJ,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
54 . SMT. KOMAL
W/O. SRI. RANGASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/AT MALLENAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
55 . SMT. PUTTAMMA
W/O. SRI. RANGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
56 . SMT. SATHYAMMA
W/O. SRI. JAVARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
10
KARLE GRAM,
HASSAN
57 . SMT. MOGANAMMA
W/O. SRI. CHIKKAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
58 . SMT. RANGAMMA
W/O. SRI. THIMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
59 . SMT. LAKSHMAMMA
W/O. SRI. KRISHNAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
60 . SMT. GANGA
W/O. SRI. CHANDRA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT M. HOSAHALLI,
KARLE GRAMA,
HASSAN
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. R.B. SADASIVAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
VIKASA SOUDHA
11
DR B.R.AMBEDKAR BEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. RAJIV GANDHI GRAMINA
VASATHI NIGAMA NIYAMITHA
NO.1,2,3,4, IT PARK
1ST FLOOR, 4TH MAIN ROAD,
RAJAJINAGARA INDUSTRIAL AREA
RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYATHI, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R. SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1;
SMT. SNEHA, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. SUMANA BALIGA, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. MADHU, M.J., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GIRISH B. BALADAAE, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE LETTER
DTD.3.8.2013 ALONG WITH LIST OF BENEFICIARIES
ISSUED BY THE R-3 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS TO
PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF HOUSES TO THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEX-D & E.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
12
ORDER
The petitioners claim that they all belong to Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe community and weaker section of the Society.
2. The petitioners submitted the representation through the authorized person for granting funds for construction of houses on the sites belonging to them. In turn respondent No.3 forwarded the same to respondent No.2 for release of funds for construction of houses. Respondent No.2 issued a communication dated 30.01.2014 to respondent No.3 to take steps to released the funds to the petitioners for the year 2013-2014 or the subsequent years, if they are found eligible.
3. The petitioners' grievance is that though respondent No.2 issued communication to respondent No.3 to take steps, respondent No.3 has not taken any steps though he is under an obligation to consider the same in terms of Section 3-E(2)(f) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act'). 13
4. Learned AGA appearing for the respondent- State submits that under Section 3-E(2)(f) of the Act, respondent No.3 is under an obligation to consider the claim of the petitioners for release of funds for construction of houses in view of the proposal sent by respondent No.2.
5. Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the petition directing respondent No.3 to consider the claim of the petitioners for releasing funds for constructing houses in light of the communication dated 03.08.2013 issued by respondent No.2 at Annexures-D and E in light of Section 3-E (2)(f) of the Act.
The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE RKA