Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mr Mahadevaiah vs The Revenue Secretary on 2 February, 2023

Author: Prasanna B. Varale

Bench: Prasanna B. Varale

                                           -1-
                                                     WP No. 22489 of 2022




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

                                        PRESENT

                  THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE

                                           AND

                         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 22489 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)

                 BETWEEN:


                 1.    MR MAHADEVAIAH
                       S/O MALLAIAH
                       HINDU, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
                       AADHAR CARD NO.579577464041
                       MOBILE NO.8105475798

                 2.    MR LOKESH H S
                       S/O SHIVARUDRAIAH
                       HINDU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
Digitally signed       AADHAR CAR NO.8092984629741
by R DEEPA             MOBILE NO.9845922249
Location: High
Court of         3.    MR KEMPARAJU H
Karnataka              S/O HANUMANTHAIAH
                       HINDU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
                       AADHAR CARD NO.915164255029
                       MOBILE NO.9738248664

                 4.    MR NAGABHUSHAN H P
                       S/O PUTTASWAMAIAH
                       HINDU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
                       AADHAR CARD NO.370334921307
                       MOBILE NO.8722413659
                           -2-
                                   WP No. 22489 of 2022




5.   MR MANJUNATH H B
     S/O BASAVARAJU
     HINDU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
     AADHAR CARD NO.647366015201
     MOBILE NO.7829777192

6.   MR KUMAR H N
     S/O NARAYANAPPA K
     HINDU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
     AADHAR CARD NO.430502341537
     MOBILE NO.9742510707

7.   MR SHIVAKUMAR
     S/O SHVIANNA
     HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
     AADHAR CARD NO.840425995455
     MOBILE NO.8722275349

8.   MR HANUMANTHARAJU P
     S/O POOJA BAIYALAPPA
     HINDU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
     AADHAR CARD NO.953378475443
     MOBILE NO.9845073778

     ALL ARE RESIDING AT HUSKUR VILLAGE
     AND POST, DASANAPURA HOBLI
     BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
                                          ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. C PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)
AND:

1.   THE REVENUE SECRETARY
     REVENUE DEPARTMENT
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
     M S BUILDING
     BENGALURU-560001
     PHONE NO.080-22032995
     EMAIL [email protected]

2.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT
     BENGALURU
                            -3-
                                      WP No. 22489 of 2022




     PHONE NO.080-22211292
     EMAIL ID-
     [email protected]/[email protected]

3.   THE TAHASILDAR
     TALUK OFFICE
     BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
     BENGALURU
     PHONE NO.080-22232050
     EMAIL [email protected]
                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA)


      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL
FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS
PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDERb)ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDERS
OR DIRECTIONS QUASHING/ANNULING THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED    21/03/2022   PASSED   BY   THE 2ND RESPONDENT-
DEPUTY   COMMISSIONER IN RESPECT        OF GOMALA LAND
BEARING SY.NO.108, HUSKUR VILLAGE, DASANAPURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK.


      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE, MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                         ORDER

Though the present petition is filed as PIL and the grievance is raised against the proposal for making a -4- WP No. 22489 of 2022 provision of additional land for public cemetery, the only objection raised in the petition is that there is already a cemetery in the village.

2. There is nothing on record to show that there is any prevention or prohibition for the Government to consider the proposal for providing additional land for the cemetery or burial ground. The order at Annexure-G indicates various reasons for need of provision of additional land for cemetery. Though learned counsel submits that the proposed land is hardly at a distance of 300 meters away from the existing cemetery and a school is hardly 50-60 meters away from the proposed place of cemetery, the learned counsel was also fair enough to submit that this ground is raised orally, on instructions, and no such ground is raised in the representation submitted to the authority which is placed on record at Annexure-L.

3. Considering all these grounds, we are unable to find any fault or error or we are unable to convince -5- WP No. 22489 of 2022 ourselves to say that a public cause is raised in the present PIL. As such, the PIL being devoid of any merit, deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-

JUDGE RD