Karnataka High Court
Sri Pramod Hanumanth Rao Muthalik vs State Of Karnataka on 11 October, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Krishna S Dixit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB
WP No. 22002 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 22002 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI PRAMOD HANUMANTH RAO MUTHALIK
S/O LATE HANUMANTHA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
PRESIDENT OF THE SRIRAM SENA(REGD),
KARNATAKA,
4TH CROSS, SADANAKERI,
DHARWAD PIN-580 008.
EMAIL-WWW.SRIRAMSENA.ORG
AADHAR-426364042977
PAN-CDTPM5693M
Digitally signed 2. SRI. S BHASKARAN,
by SHARADA S/O S SRINIVASAN,
VANI B AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
Location: HIGH R/A NO.453, 5TH CROSS,
COURT OF 1ST MAIN ROAD,
KARNATAKA
PANCHASHEELA NAGAR,
MUDALAPALYA,
BANGALORE-560 072.
[email protected]
AADHAR-224209939898
PAN-AIJPB6168R
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DHARMAPAL.,ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB
WP No. 22002 of 2023
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPT BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
UDUPI DISTRICT, DC OFFICE,
RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL, UDUPI DIST -574 102.
3. THE NIRMITHI KENDRA,
UDUPI DISTRICT,
REPT BY ITS CHAIR PERSON,
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
UDUPI DISTRICT, DC OFFICE,
RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL,
UDUPI DISTRICT -576 104.
4. THE SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVT OF KARNATAKA,
M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.
5. THE TAHASILDHAR,
KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT -574 104.
6. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
YERLAPADY VILLAGE PANCHAYAT,
KARKALA TQ, UDUPI DISTRICT -574 104.
7. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
4TH FLOOR/LEVEL NO.3,
EMBASY ICON, INFANTRY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001.
8. THE SECRETARY
KANNADA AND CULTURAL DEPARTMENT,
ROOM NO.13, GROUND FLOOR,
VIKAS SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560 001.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB
WP No. 22002 of 2023
9. THE CHAIRMAN,
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
VRPQ + 995, M G ROAD, LALBAGH,
MANGALORE, KARNATAKA-575 003.
10. THE SECRETARY,
MALENADU AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD,
SAGAR ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA-577 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. NILOUFER AKBAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R5, R7 & R8)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) WHEREFORE, IT
IS HUMBLY PRAYS THAT THIS HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO
DIRECT THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF UDUPI DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA STATE THE RESPONDENT No. 2 TO CANCEL THE
PROJECT OF PARASHURAMA THEME PARK WHICH IS UNDER
CONSTRUCTION IN Sy. No. 329/1 MEASURING 1.58 ACRES
SITUATED AT YERLAPADY VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI
DISTRICT AND TO RECOVER THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS SPENT
BY NIRMITI KENDRA THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND TO REMIT IT
TO THE CONCERNED DEPARTMENTS AND B) DIRECT THE 1ST
RESPONDENT THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA TO HOLD
ENQUIRY ON THAT REGARD BY CONSTITUTING A SUITABLE
COMMITTEE AND TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION AGAINST THE
OFFENDERS OR SUCH OTHER/DIRECTION WHICH DEEMS FIT
IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE MATTER, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB
WP No. 22002 of 2023
ORDER
The present petition is filed under caption PIL. The petitioners claim to be social activists and are related to a certain organization. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the Grama Panchayat Yerlapady village, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District undertook the work of a Theme Park under the caption "Sri Parashurama Theme Park" on the hillock of Umikal Hill, Yerlapady village near Bailur, Karkala Taluk, that there was some exchange of communication between the Panchayat Members and the Government officials; the copies of the same are placed on record at Annexures-G, H & J and the translation is supplied which is not very happily worded.
2. The petitioners have also placed on record certain photographs at Annexures-D, E & F. A bare perusal of these photographs shows that the construction work is nearing completion and considering the nature of work as depicted in the photographs on record are placed, it can be safely said that the work must have been -5- NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB WP No. 22002 of 2023 started a couple of years back. There is nothing in the petition to show that the petitioners took some timely steps to bring to the notice of concerned authorities about the construction or about the quality of their grievance construction. Now when the construction is at the stage of completion, the petitioners have suddenly woken up and approached this court for halting the project in question with no explanation for the long delay brooked.
3. The document placed on record as Annexure-K under the caption "Udupi Nirmita Kendra - Details of Bailuru Parashurama Theme Park Development Work under Yarlapadi Gram Panchayath of Karkala Taluk of Udupi District", it seems that various departments have provided financial assistance for setting up this Theme Park and these contributories are Department of Tourism, Department of Kannada & Culture, Coastal Development Authority, Mangalore, Deputy Commissioner of Udupi District (KPTCL C.S.R.), Malenadu Region Development Board, Shivamogga. The entire amount of expenditure for -6- NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB WP No. 22002 of 2023 the said Theme Park project is as huge as Rs.8,71,92,943- 00 (Rupees eight crore, seventy one lakh, ninety two thousand, nine hundred & forty three) only.
4. Interestingly the petitioners are stating in clear terms that they have objected for the theme park as it is causing some prejudice to the villagers whom they are representing. But their grievance as reflected in the memo of the petition is as to poor quality of work. The submission of petitioners that the gomal land is used for establishment of this theme park illegally. Surprisingly, there is not a single word as to petitioners or the villagers having cattle or domestic animals and that because of the project they are deprived of grazing in gomal land.
In the above circumstances, in our opinion, firstly there is enormous delay & laches; and secondly the petition is structured on a bundle of assumptions, presumptions and impressions. As such on none of the grounds, such petition can be entertained. Accordingly the -7- NC: 2023:KHC:36945-DB WP No. 22002 of 2023 petition deserves to be dismissed at the threshold and the same is dismissed in limine.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE Snb/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5