Karnataka High Court
Dasharath Jyoti Mahar @ Kamble vs The Executive Officer on 10 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724
WP No. 62980 of 2012
C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.62980 OF 2012 (LB-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO.62979 OF 2012 (LB-RES)
IN WRIT PETITION NO.62980/2012
BETWEEN:
SHRI.DASHARATH JYOTI MAHAR @ KAMBLE
AGE: 57 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed by
BHARATHI H M
(BY SRI.DASHARATH JYOTI MAHAR, ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH
AND:
Date: 2024.06.13
12:13:13 +0530
1. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUKA PANCHAYAT
HUKKERI - 591 309
DIST: BELGAUM
2. THE GRAM PANCHAYAT
KONANKERI
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY
KONANKERI - 591 225
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724
WP No. 62980 of 2012
C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
3. SMT.RAYAWWA
W/O YALLAPPA METRI
@ KAMBLE
AGE: 59 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
4. SHRI.ROSHAN YALLAPPA METRI @ KAMBLE
AGE: 34 YEARS
OCC: TAILORING
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
5. SMT.SHEELA
W/O SHANKAR RIJAKANAVAR
AGE: 32 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA : HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
6. SMT.BANU
W/O MARUTI KAMBLE
AGE: 29 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O TERANI - 416 506
TALUKA : GADHINGLAJ
DIST: KOLHAPUR
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724
WP No. 62980 of 2012
C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012
7. SHRI.RAHUL YALLAPPA METRI @ KAMBLE
AGE: 22 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA : HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.ASHOK T KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R.1 AND R.2;
SMT.SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R.3 TO R.7)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OFF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:17/12/2011 PASSED
BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E
AND ALSO RESOLUTION NO.6/16 PASSED BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT ON 17/01/2004 PERTAINING TO VPC. NO.453,
WHICH IS ILLEGALLY DIVIDED INTO CPC. NO.453/A AND 453/B
OF KONANKERI VILLAGE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND
ETC.
IN WRIT PETITION NO.62979/2012
BETWEEN:
SHRI.DASHARATH JYOTI MAHAR @ KAMBLE
AGE: 57 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.DASHARATH JYOTI MAHAR, ADVOCATE)
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724
WP No. 62980 of 2012
C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012
AND:
1. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUKA PANCHAYAT
HUKKERI - 591 309
DIST: BELGAUM
2. THE GRAM PANCHAYAT
KONANKERI
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY
KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
3. SMT.RAYAWWA
W/O YALLAPPA METRI
@ KAMBLE
AGE: 57 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
4. SHRI.ROSHAN YALLAPPA METRI @ KAMBLE
AGE: 34 YEARS
OCC: TAILORING
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA: HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
5. SMT.SHEELA
W/O SHANKAR RIJAKANAVAR
AGE: 32 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724
WP No. 62980 of 2012
C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012
TALUKA : HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
6. SMT.BANU
W/O MARUTI KAMBLE
AGE: 29 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O TERANI - 416 506
TALUKA : GADHINGLAJ
DIST: KOLHAPUR
7. SHRI.RAHUL YALLAPPA METRI @ KAMBLE
AGE: 22 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O KONANKERI - 591 225
TALUKA : HUKKERI
DIST: BELGAUM
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R.3 TO R.7;
SMT.SHARMILA M.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R.1;
R.2 - SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:23.03.2011 PASSED
BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E
AND ALSO THE RESOLUTION NO.4(2) PASSED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT ON 02.11.2010 PERTAINING TO VPC
NO.453 ESPECIALLY VPC NO.453/B OF KONANKERI VILLAGE
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724
WP No. 62980 of 2012
C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012
THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that Sri.M.G.Naganuri, learned counsel is no more and efforts were made by his colleagues to contact the petitioners and several letters were also sent to the addresses of the petitioners.
2. However, learned counsel has failed to communicate to the petitioners for want of fresh address. Similarly, the Court notices sent by this Court are also not served for want of fresh address. It is, in this background, this Court is not inclined to keep this petition pending.
3. If the learned counsel on record has passed away and it is for the petitioners to contact the colleagues of the Advocate, who passed away and take appropriate steps to prosecute the captioned writ petition. The fact that the petitioners have not turned back to the Advocate to whom they had entrusted the case clearly gives an indication -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:7724 WP No. 62980 of 2012 C/W WP No. 62979 of 2012 that petitioners are not showing any interest in prosecuting the petition.
For the reasons stated supra, the captioned writ petitions are dismissed for non-prosecution.
Pending applications, if any, are also dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70