Karnataka High Court
Smt.Kavitha vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 August, 2013
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
Bench: Huluvadi G. Ramesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH
WRIT PETITION Nos.20815-20841/2013 (KLR-RES)
C/w.W.P.Nos.18129-18140/2013 (GM-RES)
W.P.Nos.20815-841/2013 :
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.KAVITHA
W/O SUBRAMANI
35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE
R/AT NO. 60, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
2. SMT. PREMAMMA
W/O KRISHNAPPA
35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE
R/AT NO. 254, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE DISTRICT
3. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O SURESH
45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE
R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
4. SMT. VENKATALAKSHAMAMMA
W/O RAVI, 36 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE
R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
2
5. SMT. M JYOTHI
W/O MUNIKRISHNAPPA
35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE
R/AT NO.325, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
6. SMT. PUSHPA, W/O RAMESH
30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE
R/AT NO.356, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
7. SMT. RAJAMMA, W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER
R/AT NO.312, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
8. SMT. SUJATHA, W/O SUBRAMANI
27 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER
R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT
9. SMT. SUBHALAKSHMI
W/O NARASIMAMURTHY
40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER
R/AT NO. 235/1, VALEPURA DINNE,
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
10. SMT MUNIRATHNAMMA
W/O LATE SATYAMURTHY
39 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER
R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
11. SRI K SHIVAAPPA
S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA
32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER
R/AT NO. 359, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
12. SMT. LAL BHEE
W/O HUSSAIN BASHA
3
35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER
R/AT NO. 316, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
13. SRI KESHAVAMURTHY
S/O LATE NARAYANASWAMY
50 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
14. SRI VENKATESH, S/O MUNIYAPPA
38 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
15. SANJEEV KUMAR, S/O LATE R MUGAM
45 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
16. GANESH, S/O SOODAPPA
45 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
17. RAGHU N, S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
31 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
18. PRAKASH, S/O MUNIYAPPA
30 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
19. GANGADHARA, S/O HUCHAPPA
38 YEARS, R/AT NO. 173, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
20. SMT. S LALITHA
W/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH
33 YEARS, R/AT NO.300, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
21. SMT. GOWRAMMA
W/O KRISHNAMURTY
32 YEARS, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
4
22. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA
35 YEARS, R/AT NO.175, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
23. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI
W/O KRISHNAMURTHY
30 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
24. SMT. SUNITHA
W/O SRINIVASA REDDY
35 YEARS, R/AT VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
25. M ASHWATHAMMA
W/O AYYAPPA
46 YEARS, R/AT NO.190, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
26. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O SRINIVAS
58 YEARS, R/AT NO.334, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
27. JERIT GEORGE, S/O GEORGE
36 YEARS, R/AT NO.340, VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
BANGALORE DISTRICT. ... PETITIONERS
(By Sri. KALYAN R, ADVOCATE )
AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKAS SOUDHA
BANGALORE-01
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
5
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT,
BANGALORE-560002.
3. THE SPL. DY. COMMISSIONER (ENFORCEMENT WING)
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT
BANGALORE-560002
4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
BMTF, BBMP, N R SQUARE
BANGALORE-560005
5. THE TAHASILDAR
BANGALORE EAST TALUK
K R PURAM,
BANGALORE-560089 .. RESPONDENTS
( BY SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, HCGP )
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order dated
21.3.203 passed by the Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk,K.R.Puram,
Bangalore Vide Annexure-`A'.
W.P.Nos.18129-18140/2013 :
BETWEEN :
1. KAVITHA W/O ANANTHA KUMAR N
Age:32
R/A 323, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087
2. GOVINDAIAH S/O VENKATAIAH
Age:43, No.4/A 334 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087
3. SHILPA D/O SRIRAM
Age:24, 276, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087
6
4. VIJAYA LAKSHMI W/O SRINIVASACHARI
Age:42, 320, 3RD CROSS,
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
5. SHANTHAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA
Age:55, 4TH CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
6. MANJUNATH S/O NARAYAN
Age:30, R/A 277, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
7. YOSHODA W/O NAGARAJ
Age:26, R/A 332, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
8. LAKSHMANA W/O NANJUNDAPPA H V
Age:41, R/A 326, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
9. NAGARATHNA W/O KRISHNA MURTHY
Age:30, R/A 338, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
10. DAMODARAM S/O APPANNA
Age:33, R/A 342 , 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
11. PRABAKAR S/O LAKSHMINARAYANNAPA
Age:33, R/A 2ND CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE, BANGALORE 560087.
12. SATHYAVATHI W/O RAJANNA
Age:35, R/A 346, 3RD CROSS
VALEPURA DINNE
BANGALORE 560087. ... PETITIONERS
(By Sri. M G SATHEESHA & Sri T K DEEPAK, Advocates)
7
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIKAS SOUDHA
BANGALORE 560001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRIC,
BANGALORE 560002.
3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
(ENFORCEMENT WING)
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT
BANGALORE 560002
4 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE
BBMP, N R SQUARE
BANGALORE 560 005
5. TAHSILDAR BANGALORE EAST TALUK
KRISHNARAJAPURAM
BANGALORE 560089. .. Respondents
( By Smt.M.C.Nagashree, HCGP )
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of
the Constitution of India praying to quash Annexure-L impugned
order/notice dated 21.3.2013 passed by the 5th respondent.
These Writ Petitions coming on for preliminary hearing in
`B' group this day, the Court made the following :
8
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for respondents.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the property in Survey No.29 of Velapura village, totally measures 26 acres 31 guntas and it is a Government gomal land. Out of which, 5 acres 34 guntas was utilised for the purpose of construction of Janata Houses, 3 guntas were left for Yallamma Temple, 28 guntas for Shanimahatma Temple, 6 guntas for water tank, 14 guntas for Government school and playground and 1 acre 31 guntas was utilised for public road. Totally, 9 acres 36 guntas were utilised for the above said purpose and in the remaining extent of 16 acres 35 guntas, there are said to be houses built by these petitioners and some other persons illegally encroaching upon the Government gomal land. As per the directions of the Deputy Commissioner and other officers of Police Department, when the matter was brought to the notice of the Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, the Tahsildar after obtaining the report and the survey sketch from the concerned 9 Department, issued the impugned order/notice dated 21.3.2013 vide Annexure-A (in W.P.Nos.20815-41/13) and vide Annexure-L (in W.P.Nos.18129-40/13), by acting under Sections 39 (ii) and 104 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The Tahsildar has also directed the revenue authorities to initiate criminal proceedings against such encroachments as per Section 192 (A) of the KLR Act. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court seeking quashing of the impugned order passed by the Tahsildar and also among various other grounds.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that, they have put up construction of houses on the property in question which is said to be a Government gomal land. As such, they are seeking allotment of the same in their favour under Ashraya Scheme. Even the authorities have provided basic civic amenities to them. According to the petitioners, the action taken by the Tahsildar to remove such encroachments is without issuing any notice and as such, the order of the Tahsildar is non est, without authority of law and without having jurisdiction and hence, pray for quashing of the same.
10
4. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader, by filing statement of objections, submitted that the land in question is a Government/gomal land and the same is occupied unauthorisedly by various persons. As such, the Tahsildar by acting under Sections 39 (ii) and 104 of the KLR Act, has passed the impugned order and there is no illegality in the order.
5. What is being noticed in and around Bangalore and other District Headquarters is that, due to inaction on the part of the revenue authorities, slums are being developed, creating unhealthy atmosphere in a hazardous manner. Of course, for want of proper infrastructure and lack of attention by the Government, such slums are being developed illegally by encroaching upon the government lands. To eradicate such unhealthy growth of slums, stringent action has to be initiated by the Government and also to stop spreading of contagious diseases and to protect the people residing in the surrounding areas.
11
6. There is no periodical check at the government level for removal of unauthorised occupants which ultimately leads to development of slums which affect the fellow citizens from the point of health as well as it needs to protect the people residing nearby from contagious diseases and other illegal activities. Therefore, it is for the Government to take a firm decision to remove such illegal slums by taking in to consideration the hygienic point of view, security of the fellow citizens and also to take appropriate steps as one time measure so that such shelterless persons will be accommodated in proper area if they are really entitled for as per the Government norms by providing them basic amenities and it is also the duty of the government to maintain law and order in such areas. Further, a periodical check has to be conducted by the concerned officers in that regard, the Deputy Commissioner or the Tahsildar will not be in a position to implement the policies framed by the Government or to discharge their administrative work unless there is a strong political will and support by the Government.
7. Therefore, it is for the Government to hold a meeting of all the concerned officers who are responsible and to see that 12 there should be removal of illegal occupation of Government land by taking effective measures, for rehabilitation of such persons in some other area by providing facilities to lead a dignified life if they are entitled as per the norms of the Government. The Government has to keep surveillance of such unauthorised development of slums in and around Bangalore and other District Headquarters and to remove the same.
8. In the present case, the grievance of the petitioners is that without there being any notice and without authority of law, the Tahsildar has passed the impugned order to remove the illegal encroachment made by the petitioners and some other persons on government gomal land. It is also their submission that under Janata Housing scheme, they shall be granted the sites as they have put up construction of the houses thereon and residing there from past 40 years. Hence, they request to allot sites/lands which are earmarked under Ashraya Scheme. 13
9. It is disheartening to note that around City Corporations, Municipal Corporations and Town Municipalities, revenue land are being unauthorisedly occupied by persons who came in search of avocation for their livelihood which ultimately will be developed into slums. The tragedy is such encouragement for development of slums ultimately leads to multifarious problems, not only the pathetic condition of slum dwellers from the point of their health, rather it reflects our culture and casualness on the part of administration, both bureaucratic and political. The sensitivity involved is, safety of the people and citizens who live in townships. Because of uncertainty in the matter of security on account of slums developed in the midst of city, there is possibility of radical crimes like theft, robbery and even attack on female folk, molestation and attempt to commit rape from unidentified persons whose whereabouts will not be known. In the 21st century, the growth of slums in and around cities reflect the poor standard of living apart from this being highlighted at international level, which is more a concern of human right and violation of international human rights in UN Chapter. Even Art.21 of the Constitution guarantees fundamental right to every 14 citizen to lead life with dignity with proper/well developed accommodation, otherwise it will be in clear violation of Art.14 of the Constitution by the State either due to inaction or abuse and also the Directive Principles of State Policy to provide proper environment for such people, as a matter of maintenance of law and order on the part of bureaucrats not to encourage unhealthy growth in the surroundings of cities and towns by curbing growth of slums and evacuating the unauthorised occupants on revenue lands (government lands). Unless Political Will is there in the matter, it is difficult to proceed without initiating stern action in maintenance of law and order by bureaucrats in the field. The unhealthy growth surrounding cities will have a bearing on the safety of city dwellers apart from spreading of contagious diseases due to unhygienic living conditions. As goes the saying prevention is better than cure, it is the primary concern of bureaucrats and the government in power to react to the situation to lead towards healthy development of cities and towards progress in stead of casual approach. In this regard seriousness on the part of the Executive (administration) is very much required not only to implement things in letter but in spirit. 15 Otherwise, unauthorised occupation of government lands by way of slums will become a problem in course of time, it will become incorrigible unless proper steps are taken.
10. It is also pertinent to note, unless political heads strengthen the hands of Executive bureaucrats in matter of maintenance of law and order, in the matter of clearance of slums and provide safety from the point of health and security, any attempt in this regard by an officer in the field with responsibility would not be effective.
11. The power of judicial review and independence of judiciary is the basic structure of our Constitution. In exercise of power of judicial review often it is necessitated to take judicial note of inaction on the part of the Executive from the point of administration and issue necessary directions for proper implementation and execution. The State being a major litigant, if basic problems are solved radically, litigation will be reduced at the threshold.
16
12. Innovation of new methods for resolving disputes at the threshold by introducing S.89, CPC like arbitration, conciliation, mediation, judicial settlements and lok adalats is to speed up the process of resolving the disputes. Incamera proceedings are held in Chambers in family disputes to resolve the matter as a matter of maintaining privacy. Judges are participating and presiding over lokadalats and other forums of settlement to simplify the procedure of legal system and to resolve the disputes at an early date.
13. If an issue/problem of removal of encroachment of government land and clearance of slum so as to provide suitable environment for healthy living to the poor and needy is not a serious issue, I am afraid which is the other matter more serious than this one. However, it is made clear the problem of unauthorised occupation and unhealthy growth over government land / tank area and development of slums in and around the towns and cities not only in Bangalore City but in other Cities in the State, is a serious problem and its removal and to rehabilitate the slum dwellers has to be taken care of by the 17 government on a war footing basis in view of the various contingencies noted above and to strengthen the hands of the officers in the field in the process of execution.
14. The impugned order passed by the Tahsildar shall be treated as a notice to individual petitioners and they are required to give their reply to the same. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the Tahsildar who is the competent authority to deal with such matter. However, it is made clear that, if there is unauthorised occupation, the Tahsildar shall deal with the matter to evict them in accordance with law. However, petitioners may approach the Government seeking for an alternate if they are so entitled. If they are not entitled to such rehabilitation, then it is for the Tahsildar to take a decision to evict them in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 21.3.2013 vide Annexure-A (in W.P.Nos.20815-41/13) and vide Annexure-L (in W.P.Nos.18129-40/13) passed by the Tahsildar, Bangalore East Taluk, are set aside and the matter is remanded to Tahsildar for 18 consideration of the matter after giving opportunity to the petitioners.
Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE bk/