K S Shesha Prasad vs The Deputy Commissioner & District ... on 9 November, 2009

[Cites 2, Cited by 13]

Karnataka High Court

K S Shesha Prasad vs The Deputy Commissioner & District ... on 9 November, 2009

Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE»

DATED THIS THE 9"' DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2r:>Ec";é,:AE'L 

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR.P.D.DINAKAR}3N,  X 7

Am
THE HON'BLE MR.:msTf::cE MAO?-'QM S.igfAf\iTAE§.JA6éUDAR
WRIT PETITION :§o.1*8ooTri'22ob;L{EME~:2Es-PIL)

BETWEEN:

1.  'V    
S/o.K.Shamam_1a " '
Agedvniﬁvyears 

I3hr:1mar_ "1b_a Extexxsicn
Chamaraj an agai -~ T0"s.>vn;--._ " --- '

2. S.Suresh__' %
Major "
}?:'fEsident _ V
B-rah-maria Yuva Védike

~  ' ' Sujatha Saw Mill
 V  E2.0a_d_'_.
2 A Clrxaxrxalfajaggagar Town

H 3. £i'.s.EénEé'sh

s/o.1a1.e H.S.Subba Rae

 'A .Aged '29 years
-- _ . _Bf_ahmir1 Street, Haradanahaiiy
 Chamarajanagar Taluk 63: Dist.



I
i\J
I

4. H.1V;E.Lakshminarayana

(By _Sri   T' V '
AND: ' V A A

1.

S/olate Mannar

H.V. Krishna Murthy

Aged 49 years

Brahrnin Street, Haradanahally
Chamarajanagar Taluk 8: Dist.
I-I.R.Venkatachalaiah 
S/0.1ate Rangappa

Aged 65 years

Brahrnin Street, Haradanahally
Chamarajanagar Taluk 8: Dist."

H.B.Shanth.a Murthy  . 

S/o.1ate H.S.Bheema .Rao E

Brahrnin Street " 'A = '

Haradanahally  H  V _ V   ._ 
Chamarajangar' T_a1u1<:'&  . '   PHITIONERS

The E)<=:p:L1'£,y C'emm'issi'oner. '
And District Ma'g:$:ra:e_  
Chamarajan agar Dist»rVi'é't.
Chamarajan2iga;'v--. ' ' "

 T8§1s:i_1darA  ' ..... .. v

' VtCha.1na.r;aLj'éi13.:agar Taluk
 Cha1ma_ra_i anagar

Piittaﬁneii Nﬁika

_S;fo.B_a1iep'ukkanna Ranga Naika

Majar 

 .. R/0.1%-aradanahally Village
 V Chamarajanagar Taluk 8: District



4. C.B.Sugreeva
Major
S/o.late Balakrishna Raju
Devanga 3rd Street
Chamaraj anagar Town--57 1 3 I 3

5. Raghava, major
S/o.late Balakrishna Raju   
Byadaxnudlu Village : '
Haradanahally Hobli
Chamarajanagar Taluk 8: Dist.

6. Jamee1Ahrned. major
S / o.1\/Iohammed Hameed
R/ollaradanahally .   . *  '   
Chamaraj anagar Taluk AD--_ist;_ ' V : :~ RESPONDEZNTS

(BY S1'iB.VeeraPDa, AG1}.~f0%.t.Ri '¢1rA}.?/2    
Sri N.Y.Gum'prakasl1, A.d_vocate.'fQrVV R3'

R4 &R6g's:eyve+d"  , g   _
R5--held'sufﬁcieI1t} b      

"lThIs_wr1t' pet1t1on'is"f11ed. under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Coristitution lof'"ind»ia,'2'rpraying to direct R1 & R2 to hold
and completerthe*en'quir'y"arid further to remove the unlawful
obstructionaand en_.c1'o_ac:hment Immediately and to remove
public ~m,1isance Caused by R3 to R6 hereln, etc.

 'writ ;H3et'i'ti'oVn coming on for hearing, this day

  SIEANTANAGOUDAR, J., delivered the following-

JUDGMENT

lpublic interest litigation is filed for a direction to: respondents 1 and 2 to remove unlawful obstruction /W3 and encroachment and to remove public nuisance caused by respondents herein, after holding The petitioners have also sought for ~ respondents 3 to 6 from causing .an},r_laWful'v"obst.ruc4tio1'2,_ ll' and/ or public nuisance in including unlawful crem_atioIlr0If burial it as " it the case may be.

2. According Sy.No.8 of Bandigere j1__(rn.%Qj¢}€ Hobli. and measuring 5 acres 12 gun_tas_ dmeant for Grave Yard since time immemorial _."ﬂ*i'he".»isaid Grave Yard is being used by niembersof Brahmin Community of 5 Villages, »n:a;rr_1VeiyV, *A.,gBasavapura, Venkataiahana Chatra, V V S Ankanashettypura Village and There is no other place available for A C_*p:eri'orI1iai'1ce of the said religious obsequies ceremonies ' of the community in the said villages. A bore well is to also dug in the said property to provide water for performing the obsequies ceremonies on the

3. Respondents are the owners adjoining the said Sy.No.8 According to the petitioners,' respondents 3:..i;o':6 encroaching Sy.No.8 though'V'Vit»V.:._i's rrreant for Grave Yard; that Hhandedly and illegally sought a gate to obstruct diet. 4' '~./grave Yard. The petitioners jurisdictional police and "dead bodies had to be crernatedzp Cvopiesilpofcomplaints are produced at Anrierrures-Oi.' 8., dated 20.7.1998 and 12.8.1998 'reenectiv.el,."~--. So also re resentations as er 1' and U, dated 20.7.1998, 12.8.1998 and respectively are filed by the petitioners before A lthe~._concerned authorities. Ultimately, the second responderit appointed a Surveyor to make spot survey be A5,-

and to report. The copy of the survey sketch is produced at Annexure--V. In spite of the complaints and the representations, no action is taken. Hence, petition is filed.

4. Having regard to the material record, is, it clear that the grievance of the peatitionetrs that the representations/ conipiaintsvh are not considered 'V by the concerned authoritieseffectively. Itfthey land in question is reserved as a Grave" tiiié 'Syame will have to be protected'so'_.'-- '.3-. if they have no right, title -'the property in question, cannot tsvhaii not eiicroach upon the property in question'. The'--Grays Yard has to be maintained for 'p,1ii;~1ic Therefore, the 181 respondent-Deputy Coriiniissiojner shall consider the representations filed by petitioners and initiate action in accordance with A '~:df"1ai3v"against the concerned. Hence, the following order is n:;.ade:-

f a»' / i First respondent--Deputy Commissioner is di-rested to consider the representations filed by the and initiate action against erring peop1ei_r1""accordaneei_ with law as expeditiously, but riot limit of three months from the of reeeipt order. It is also open for the_V'.%petitio'IrerVs'Vto 'file fresh representations, if they:.';ﬁ5=o. e_hoose: ._ _' » ' " « _ _ Writ petirioriis aVeeordingly.


/"E
5»«»..,» x

 ....     "  
1 i i   Chief Iustice

Sd/-
KFDGE

 Vi  inclexzz /No
~ Wehéﬁostz Yes/No
 fck,/.=-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court