Sri. Anjaneyaswamy Temple Trust vs State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2022

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. Anjaneyaswamy Temple Trust vs State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2022

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                           1



  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

       WRIT PETITION NO.59001 OF 2015 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI ANJANEYASWAMY TEMPLE TRUST
HOSAPATE, HULIYURDURGA,
REP BY ITS PRESIDENT,
SRI H T VENKATESH
S/O LATE THIRUMALA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT VAJARA PALYA VILLAGE,
HOSAHALLI POST,
HULIYURDURGA HOBLI,
KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT.                          ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI P.M.SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

  1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
     PWD DEPARTMENT,
     MS BUILDING,
     BANGALORE - 560001.

  2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
     PWD KUNIGAL SUB DIVISION,
     KUNIGAL, TUMKUR DISTRICT,
     PIN CODE: 572130.
                                 2



   3. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
      HULIYURDURGA GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
      HULIYURDURGA HOBLI,
      KUNIGAL TALUK,
      TUMKUR DISTRICT,
      PIN CODE - 572130.                ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI NITHYANANDA K.R, AGA FOR R1-R2,
 SRI A NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 )
                           ----
      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT FROM NOT TO DISPOSSESSING THE PETITIONER
FROM THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT
THERE BEING ANY DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

This petition is filed seeking direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the property in question without following due procedure of law.

2. Learned Additional Government Advocate on instruction submits that the respondent No.2 has only removed the encroachment on the foot path and has not taken any steps to dispossess the petitioner from the property in question.

3. The aforesaid submission is placed on record. 3

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of holding that the respondents shall not dispossess the petitioner from the property in question without following due procedure of law.

5. In so far relief for damage is concerned, petitioner is at liberty to approach the Jurisdictional Civil Court for recovering the alleged damage in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE HR

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court