Karnataka High Court
Mr. K. Somanath Naik vs The Director General Of Archeologist on 23 March, 2023
Author: Prasanna B. Varale
Bench: Prasanna B. Varale
-1-
WP No. 5067 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO. 5067 OF 2023 (LB-RES-PIL)
BETWEEN:
MR. K. SOMANATH NAIK,
S/O JAYAWANTA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEAS,
R/AT 2-34-4
GENESH NIVASA, PERVAGE ROAD,
KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA 574104
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAKSHITH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by R DEEPA
Location: High 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ARCHEOLOGIST,
Court of ARCHAELOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA,
Karnataka
DHAROHAR BHAWAN, 24 TILAK MARG,
NEW DELHI 110001
2. THE SENIOR CONSERVATION ASSISTANT
ARCHAELOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA,
BENGALURU CIRCLE,
BENGALURU 560034
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ARCHAEOLOGIST
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA,
5TH FLOOR 'F' KENDRIYA SADAN,
17TH MAIN ROAD,
-2-
WP No. 5067 of 2023
KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU 560034
4. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA,
BENGALURU CIRCLE,
CHORD ROAD, BEHIND SBI BANK,
RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL TOWN,
RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU 560010
5. THE CHIEF OFFICER
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,
KARKALA, KARKALA TALUK 574104
6. THE TAHSILDAR
TALUK OFFICE,
KARKALA,
KARKALA TALUK 574104
7. THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
UDUPI DISTRICT 576104
8. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
TOWN POLICE STATION,
KARKALA, D.K. DIST 574104
9. SRI NITHYANANADA PAI
AGED ABOUT MAJOR
10. SMT SHAILA N PAI
W/O NITHYANANADA PAI,
AGED ABOUT MAJOR
BOTH RESPONDENT No.9 AND 10 ARE
R/AT HP GAS, NEAR LIC BUILDING
PERVAJE ROAD, KARKALA, KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 104.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R6, R8 & R9)
-3-
WP No. 5067 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO IMPLEMENT THE STOP
NOTICE DATED 27.05.22 AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND
SUBSEQUENTLY TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO. 5 AND 7 TO
IMPLEMENT ITS NOTICE DATED 16.05.22, 06.06.22 AND FINAL
NOTICE DATED 06.12.22 ISSUED BY THE TOWN MUNICIPAL
COUNCIL AS PER ANNEXURE-C,D,E FORTHWITH AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court with a grievance of certain activities leading to damaging, destructing and defacing the archaeological property of monument of 'Sri Anantha Padmanabha Temple', Karkala and failure of the machinery, particularly, the law enforcing agencies to take prompt action.
2. Our attention was invited to the documents placed on record. Annexure-B is the copy of 'Stop Notice' dated 27.05.2022, issued by the Office of the Archaeological Survey of India, Bangalore Circle, Karkala Sub-Circle. A reference is made to certain provisions of the Ancient Monuments Archaeological Sites and Remains -4- WP No. 5067 of 2023 (Amendment & Validation) Act, 2010 (for short 'the said Act of 2010'), particularly the provisions of Section 20C, 20A(4) and 30A of the said Act of 2010.
3. The learned Additional Government Advocate, accepting notice on behalf of respondents No.6, 8 and 9, on instructions, submitted before us that in view of an approach to the concerned police station through one Sri. Gokul Praveen, a Government Official, an FIR vide Crime No.37/2023 is lodged on 22.03.2023, at Karkala Sub- Division for commission of the offence, against two accused persons under Section 447 r/w Section 34 of the IPC as well as Sections 20A, 30A & 30B of the said Act of 2010. Learned Additional Government Advocate further submits that on lodgment of report, the investigation agency is set in motion and is under the exercise of taking further steps.
4. In view of the submission of learned Additional Government Advocate, we are of the opinion that the -5- WP No. 5067 of 2023 grievance raised by the petitioner is duly addressed. The report is already registered and law is set in motion. Needless to state that the initiation by way of FIR would require some time to reach at its logical end and as such, permitting the concerned authority to take appropriate steps as required under the provisions of law, would meet the ends of justice. It may not be out of place to state that the petitioner may also help the law enforcing agency so as to reach at a logical end.
5. With these observations, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE RD