Karnataka High Court
Sri D V Venkataramaiah vs The Government Of Karnataka on 20 March, 2020
Author: B.Veerappa
Bench: B. Veerappa
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
WRIT PETITION No.25831/2018 (KLR-CON)
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.26677/2018
C/W
WRIT PETITION No.5640/2020 (KLR-RES)
IN W.P. No.25831/2018 & W.P. NO.26677/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI.D.V.VENKATARAMAIAH
S/O.LATE D.V.VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT NO.327, DEVANARAYANASWAMY
STREET, KANDAVARPET
CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.NAGARAJAPPA.A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
REPTD., BY ITS SECRETRY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M.S.BUILDING
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT
CHICKBALLAPURA - 562101.
2
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
CHICKBALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION
CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.
4. THE TAHASILDAR
CHICKBALLAPURA TALUK
CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 101.
5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CHICKBALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION
CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.
6. THE CHICKBALLAPURA URBAN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CHICKBALLAPURA
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
PIN - 562 101.
7. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR
NANDI HOBLI
CHICKBALLAPURA TALUK
CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 101.
8. SRI.RAJAGOPALACHAR
S/O.LATE NARAYANSWAMY
PRIEST IN CHANNARAYASWAMY TEMPLE
9. SRI.RAMA PADMANABHACHAR
S/O.NARAYANASWAMY
10. SRI.ASWATH NARAYANACHAR
S/O.RANGACHAR
10(a) K.PADMA
W/O.LATE ASWATH NARAANACHAR
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
3
10(b) A.PRASANNA
S/O.LATE ASWATH NARAANACHAR
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
10(c) PRATIBHA
D/O.LATE ASWATH NARAANACHAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
10(d) PRAPULLA
D/O.LATE ASWATH NARANAANACHAR
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
10(e) PRAGATHI
D/O.LATE ASWATH NARAANACHAR
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
NO.14, 2ND CROSS, SHABARINAGARA
BAYTARAYANAPURA
BENGALURU - 560 092.
11. SRI.S.P.NARASIMHACHAR
S/O.LATE DODDA PADMANABHACHAR
1ST CROSS, BHAGHATH SINGH NAGAR
POLICE QUARTER BACK SIDE
CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101.
RESPONDENT NOS.8 TO 10
ARE R/AT MYLAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE
KALAVARA POST, NANDI HOBLI
CHICKBALLAPURA TALUK
AND DISTRICT - 562 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.Y.D.HARSHA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-5 AND R-7;
BY SRI.YOGESH.D.NAIK, ADV., FOR R-6;
BY SRI.B.MANJUNATH, ADV., FOR R-8, R-9, R-10(a)
TO R-10(e), AND R-11)
4
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS IMPLEMENT
AND TO ENFORCE THE ORDERS AT ANNEXURE-E, F, F1,
F2, K IN CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS
SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURE-H AND H1 RESPECTIVELY.
IN WRIT PETITION NO.5640/2020
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.RAJGOPALACHAR
S/O.LATE NARAYANSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
2. SRI.RAMA PADMANABHACHAR
S/O.LATE NARAYANSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
3. ASHWATH NARAYANCHAR
S/O.LATE NARAYANSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT MYLLAPANAHALLI VILLAGE
KALAVARA POST, NANDI HOBLI
CHIKKBALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.B.MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)
5
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT
CHIKKBALLAPUR - 562 101.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT
CHIKKBALLAPUR - 562 101.
3. THE TAHASILDAR
CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT
CHIKKBALLAPUR - 562 101.
4. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR
KALAVARA GRAM PANCHAYATH
CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT
CHIKKBALLAPUR - 562 101.
5. SRI.VENKATARAMANAIH
S/O.LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/AT DEVANARAYANSWAMY BEEDI
KANDAVAR PETE, WARD NO.18
CHIKKBALLAPUR TOWN.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.Y.D.HARSHA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4;
BY SRI.A.NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE FOUND AT ANNX-E
ISSUED BY THE R-3, DATED 28.01.2020 AND ETC.,
6
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner in W.P.No.25831/2018 - Venkataramaiah is claiming to be the owner of
Sy.Nos.46/2, 46/3 filed the present writ petition for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos.1 to 7 to implement and enforce the order at Annexures-E, F, F1, F2 and K, by considering the representations as per Annexures-H and H1 respectively.
2. The petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 filed the petition seeking for a writ of certiorari to quash the notice at Annexure-'E' issued by the third respondent bearing No.N.C.R./C.R/30/2016-17 dated 28.01.2020.
3. It is the case of the petitioner in W.P.No.25831/2018 that he is the owner of the property 7 bearing Nos.46/2, 46/3 and respondent Nos.8 to 11 claimed to be the temple priests of Channarayanaswamy temple, Mylappanahalli village, Nandi Hobli, had applied for grant of occupancy rights before the Land Tribunal, Chickkaballapura. The Land Tribunal, Chickkaballapura, granted occupancy rights in respect of Sy.Nos.42, 55, 134 and 195 of Mylappanahalli village. It is submitted that out of the various lands granted by the Land Tribunal to the contesting respondents which put together measuring 15 acres and out of which 20 guntas of lands sold in favour of Aswathanarayanachar and S.P.Narasimhachar for valuable consideration in Sy.No.42/1. The said sale is also contrary to the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 and as well as Karnataka Religious and Charitable Inams Abolition Act, 1955, vis-à-vis the respondent Nos.8 to 11 presently holding the lands approximately 12 acres in Sy.Nos.42/1, 42/2 and 42/3 and they 8 cannot put up construction of buildings illegally, without permission and contrary to the grant order under Inams Abolition Act, 1960 and also contrary to the Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 and contrary to the Karnataka Town Planning Act, 1961. According to the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner as well as Assistant Commissioner, Tahsildar and ADLR came to the conclusion that respondent Nos.8 to 11 have constructed building in Sy.Nos.42/1, 42/2. Accordingly, various notices came to be issued as per Annexure-'E', 'F', F1', 'F2 and 'K', till today the same has not been implemented. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court for the relief sought for.
4. It is the case of the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 that on 01.10.1981, they have been granted land in Sy.No.42 of Myllapanahalli village, Nandi Hobli, Chikkaballapur under the Chennakeshava 9 Temple Inamthi to an extent of 3 acres 26 guntas and that they have enjoyed the said property. In the year 1995-96, the villagers and the petitioners after collection of donation has constructed temples in the said property, since it is a granted land and the same has been livelihood of the petitioners who are basically Archakas. The fifth respondent who is the petitioner in W.P.No.25831/2018 made representation before the Authorities that the petitioners have encroached the pathway and have closed the pathway by putting stone slabs on the said pathway illegally. The petitioners and the villagers had given representation to the concerned revenue officials to regularize the Temple Construction, but till date no action has been taken by respondent Nos.1 to 4. It is the further case of the petitioners that the land was inspected and surveyed and report came to be filed by the Tahsildar after verification of the survey record stating that the said lands has no pathway in the 10 said land and there is no such encroachment except the temple being constructed without any permission. Thus, the Tahsildar issued notice dated 28.01.2020 to demolish the temples within 3 days. Accordingly, the petitioners filed objections to the said show cause notice on 05.02.2020. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court for the relief sought for.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
6. Sri.Nagarajappa, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.25831/2018 and also for respondent No.5 in W.P.No.5640/2020 contended that the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 have been granted lands in Sy.No.42 of Myllapanahalli village, Nandi Hobli, Chikkaballapur, have encroached the pathway by putting stone slabs on the said pathway illegally. Though the Deputy Commissioner, Assistant 11 Commissioner, ADLR and Tahsildar as well as State Government issued several notices to respondent Nos.8 to 11 and petitioner No.5 in W.P.No.5640/2020, but the same has not been implemented till today. Therefore, petitioner made representation to the authorities as per Annexures-'H' and 'H1', but the same has not been considered. Therefore, he sought to allow the writ petitions filed by the petitioner in W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018 and dismiss the petition filed by the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020, as the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not against show cause notice.
7. Per contra, Sri.Manjunatha, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.8 to 11 and also petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 contended that the notice issued by the Tahsildar on 28.01.2020 for demolish of the temple building and that they also filed objections before the Tahsildar on 05.02.2020 stating that they have 12 constructed temples within the property of Sy.No.42 and they have not encroached any Government land or closed the pathway. It is the mistake committed by the authorities while surveying the survey Nos.42/1, 42/2, 42/3 and 42/4 and denied encroachment by filing objections. He would further contend that the Tahsildar without holding proper enquiry and based on the allegations made by the fourth respondent and other authorities, the notice came to be issued, the same cannot be sustained. Therefore, he sought to allow the writ petition No.5640/2020 and dismiss the writ petition No.25831/2018.
8. Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate, submits that the prayer sought by the petitioner in W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018, the Tahsildar has already initiated proceedings on the basis of the direction issued by the 13 Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner and accordingly, notice dated 28.01.2020 came to be issued against the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 to show cause as to why the temple should not be demolished and evicted within seven days. The petitioners therein have filed objections before the Tahsildar on 05.02.2020. It is for the Tahsildar to take appropriate steps after conducting enquiry in accordance with law. Therefore, the very writ petition filed by the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 against the show cause notice is not maintainable and sought to dismiss the petition. He would further contend that in view of the proceedings initiated by the Tahsildar as per Annexure-A in W.P.No.5640/2020, the respondents in W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018 are contemplated to initiate proceedings to implement orders for the notice issued. Therefore, he sought to dismiss the writ petitions.
14
9. Sri.Naik, learned counsel for respondent No.6 in W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018 has submitted that already public notice issued and stated that without conversion, respondent Nos.8 to 11 have put up constructions and there is no proper facilities available. Therefore, he submits that it is for the authorities to take action in accordance with law.
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties in both the writ petitions. The specific case of the petitioner in W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018 that respondent Nos.8 to 11 who were petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 have constructed the temple unauthorisedly in Sy.No.42 by encroaching Government land including the pathway and thereby, prevented the petitioners and other villagers. It is the specific case of the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 that the temple building constructed only in Sy.No.42 and not encroached any Government land or pathway as alleged 15 by the petitioners in other writ petitions. It is also not in dispute that pursuant to the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner and Tahsildar, Public Works Department and Urban Development, the Tahsildar initiated proceedings by issuing show cause notice on 28.01.2020 which is the subject matter in W.P.No.5640/2020. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 already filed objections on 05.02.2020, in response to the eviction notice issued by the jurisdictional Tahsildar. It is for the Tahsildar along with the concerned ADLR to inspect Sy.No.42 and other adjacent land and to find out whether the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 have constructed the temple within Sy.No.42 or encroached the Government land including the pathway has alleged by the 5th respondent who is the petitioner in W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018 and find out whether the temple building constructed 16 within Sy.No.42 or including pathway by constructing compound wall with slab. Admittedly, the petitioners in W.P.No.5640/2020 already filed objections to the show cause notice. It is for the third respondent - Tahsildar to consider the objections and to pass orders after holding enquiry and after giving opportunities to both the parties pass orders strictly in accordance with law. It is also made clear till such consideration, the Tahsildar cannot proceed with the eviction notice to demolish the building.
11. Accordingly, W.P.Nos.25831/2018 and 26677/2018 is disposed of directing the authorities to proceed with the enquiry in pursuance to the notice dated 28.01.2020 in implementation of Annexures-'E', F1, F2 and 'K' and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four months and W.P.No.5640/2020 is disposed of as not maintainable 17 by reserving liberty to the petitioners to persuade their case before the Tahsildar and Tahsildar shall consider the objections and pass orders in accordance with law.
Both the parties are directed to appear before the Tahsildar on 30.05.2020.
Sd/-
JUDGE VMB