Karnataka High Court
Sri Shiva Mc vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 February, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 415
Bench: Chief Justice, Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION No.11167 OF 2019 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SHIVA MC.,
S/O LATE SRI CHIKKAVEERANNA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
2. Smt. JAYAMMA
W/O LATE SRI CHIKKAVEERANNA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
3. Smt. SHEELAVATHI C.P.
W/O SRI SHIVA M.C.
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.
4. Smt. KAMALAMMA
W/O. MALLESH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
5. SRI VENKATESH
S/O KEMPEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
6. Smt. SUNITHA
W/O VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
-2-
7. SRI CHINNAMAYI
S/O SRI GOVINDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.
8. SRI JAGADEESH
S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
PETITIONERS 1 TO 8
ARE ALL R/OF MADAPURA VILLAGE
AMBADAHALLI POST
VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 138. ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI V. VINOD REDDY FOR
SRI PAPI REDDY G., ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
MULTISTOREYED BUILDINGS
Dr. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001
REP BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
RAMANAGARA - 562 160.
3. THE TAHASILDAR
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
CHENNAPATNA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 160.
4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYAT
CHENNAPATNA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 160.
-3-
5. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
CHENNAPATNA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 262 160.
6. THE BANNADAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYAT
AMBADAHALLI POST
VIRUPAKSHAPURA HOBLI
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
RAMANAGAA DISTRICT
REP BY PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
PIN - 562 134.
7. THE HEALTH OFFICER
TALUK HEALTH CENTRE
CHENNAPATNA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 160.
8. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
ENGINEERING DIVISION
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
CHENNAPATNA
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 160.
9. SRI CHICKARAJU
S/O LATE SRI SIDDE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/OF MADAPURA VILLAGE
AMBADAHALLI POST
VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 134.
10. SRI CHINNAGIRI GOWDA
S/O LATE SRI SIDDE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/OF MADAPURA VILLAGE
AMBADAHALLI POST
-4-
VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI
CHENNAPATNA TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN - 562 134. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI A.C. BALARAJ, AGA FOR R1-R3, 5, 7 AND 8
SRI K.N. PUTTEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R9 AND R10
SRI B.J. SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R6)
---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
& 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R-1 TO 8 TO REMOVE ENCROACHMENT MADE
UPON A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC VILLAGE ROAD AT
MADAPURA AND TO PROHIBIT LOCATION AND
ESTABLISHMENT OF POULTRY FARM IN THE SCHEDULE
PROPERTY AND ALSO IN THE ENCROACHED PORTION OF
THE VILLAGE ROAD AT MADAPURA AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the ninth and tenth respondents.
2. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, we find that there is no prima facie material placed on record to show that any encroachment has been made by the ninth and tenth -5- respondents on the public road. Our attention is invited to Circular dated 3rd December 2015 issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board laying down the environmental guidelines for poultry farms. The guidelines show that the poultry farms should not be located within 500 meters from residential zone.
3. Though the sixth respondent has granted licence to the ninth and tenth respondents to run poultry farm, the sixth respondent must examine whether the poultry farm of the ninth and tenth respondents is in terms of the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.
4. We direct the sixth respondent to examine the aforesaid aspect. If the sixth respondent is of the view that the poultry farm is being run in violation of the aforesaid guidelines, appropriate order shall be passed by the sixth respondent after giving an opportunity of being heard to the ninth and tenth respondents and the person to whom the licence has -6- been granted. This exercise shall be completed within two months from today.
5. We make it clear that we have made no adjudication upon objections raised to the locus of the petitioners.
6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE bkm