Karnataka High Court
K. Baskar Raju vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 March, 2020
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M. Shyam Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.107531 OF 2016 (GM-RES)
& WRIT PETITION NOS.107698-700 OF 2016
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO.105487 OF 2016
IN WRIT PETITION NO.107531 OF 2016
& WRIT PETITION NOS.107698-700 OF 2016
BETWEEN
1. K. BASKAR RAJU
S/O RAJAM RAJU
AGE:65 YEARS
OCC. AGRL.,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE
H.B. HALLI TALUKA
DIST. BALLARI
2. K. SATYAVATI
W/O K. BASKAR RAJU
AGE: , OCC. HOUSEWIFE
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE
H.B. HALLI TALUKA
DIST. BALLARI
3. K. PRUTHVIRAJ
S/O K. BASKAR RAJU
AGE:
OCC. AGRL.,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE
H.B. HALLI TALUKA
2
DIST. BALLARI
4. M. RAMBABU
S/O BAPI RAJU
AGE:
OCC. AGRL,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE
H.B. HALLI TALUKA
DIST. BALLARI
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. LAXMAN T MANTAGANI, ADV.,
& SRI. N. J. APPANNAVAR, ADV.,)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION,
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU-01
2. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM NIYAMITHA
TUNGABHADRA PROJECT CIRCLE,
MUNIRABAD.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM NIYAMITHA,
SINGATALUR LIFT IRRIGATION PROJECT,
DIVISION NO.2, HOOVINAHADAGALI
DIST. BALLARI.
4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
SINGATALUR LIFT IRRIGATION PROJECT
SUB-DIVISION NO.2
KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM NIYAMITHA
HOOVINAHADAGALI,
DIST. BALLARI
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GANGDHAR S. HOSAKERI, AGA FOR R1;
3
SRI. G. K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADV., FOR R2 TO R4)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE
226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:30.07.2016,
PASSED BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-P.
IN WRIT PETITION NO.105487 OF 2016
BETWEEN
S. S. RAJASHEKAR
S/O SIDDAPPA,
AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O ENIGI BASAPURA VILLAGE,
TQ: H.B. HALLI,
DIST: BALLARI.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. T HANUMAREDDY, ADV.,)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION,
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION,
ANANDA RAO CIRCLE,
BENGALURU-560001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND
BALLARI DISTRICT,
BALLARI-583101
4
4. THE TAHASILDAR
H.B. HALLI TALUK, H.B. HALLI.
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAMA NIYAMITHA,
SINGATALURU LIFT IRRIGATION PROJECT,
DIVISION.NO.2,
HUVINAHADAGALI,
DIST: BALLARI.
6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT,
HUVINAHADAGALI,
DIST: BALLARI
7. BHASKARA RAJU
S/O RAJAMARAJU,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURIST,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE,
TQ: H.B. HALLI,
DIST: BALLARI.
8. M.RAMBABU
S/O BAPIRAJU,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE,
TQ: H.B. HALLI,
DIST: BALLARI.
9. SMT.K.SATHYAVATHI
W/O BHASKARA RAJU,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: AGRICULTURIST AND HOUSEHOLD,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE,
TQ: H.B. HALLI,
DIST: BALLARI.
5
10. K.PRUTHVI RAJ S/O BHASKARA RAJU,
AGE: MAJOR,
OCC: BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURIST,
R/O ENIGI VILLAGE,
TQ: H.B. HALLI, DIST: BALLARI.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GANGADHAR S. HOSAKERI, AGA FOR R1 TO 4
AND 6; SRI. LAXMAN T MANTAGANI, ADV., FOR C/R7;
R8 TO R10 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
& 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE PERMISSION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.5 TO THE RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 10
DATED:10.06.2016, VIDE ANNEXURES-C, C1, C2 AND C3;
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.5 TO RESTRAIN THE
RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 10 TO DRAW THE WATER FROM
BACK WATER OF TUNGABHADRA RIVER AT ENIGI
BASAPURA VILLAGE IN H.B. HALLI TALUK AND BALLARI
DISTRICT.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The Executive Engineer, Karnataka Neeravari Nigama Niyamitha, Singataluru Lift Irrigation Project by his order dated 10.06.2016 (as per Annexures-C, C1, C2 and C3) has granted permission to the petitioners in 6 W.P.No.105487/2016, who are farmers, to lay pipes to draw from the backwaters of Tunga - Bhadra river for a period of three years. The writ petition in W.P.No.107531/2016 and the connected petitions are filed impugning these orders dated 10.06.2016 with further prayers. But, the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari District has subsequently cancelled these orders dated 10.06.2016 by his Order dated:30.07.2016. The other writ petition in W.P.No.105487/2016 is filed impugning this subsequent Order dated 30.07.2016.
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ballari District by his order dated 30.7.2016 has cancelled the earlier orders dated 10.06.2016 permissions on the ground that the Executive Engineer has no power to issue such permissions and only local T.B.Board Authority could have issued such permissions. The grievance of the petitioners in W.P.No.105487/2016 is that the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari District has passed this order dated 30.07.2016 withdrawing permissions even without a notice or opportunity of being heard.
7
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.107531/2016 and the connected petitions, and the learned AGA, canvass that the writ petitions are rendered infructuous because the term for which the permissions were granted viz., three years from 10.06.2016 has expired during the pendency of the writ petitions, and therefore, the writ petitions could be disposed of with these observations.
4. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.105487/2016 submits that because the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari District has withdrawn permission much before the expiry of the term for which such permissions are granted, and because these permissions are withdrawn without notice and without an opportunity of being heard, the petitioners can seek permission for the period which they would have been entitled to but for the withdrawal order. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioners in W.P.No.105487/2016 could be redressed with these petitioner's being given liberty to make necessary application with the local T.B.Board Authority for grant of permission for the period that they would have been 8 entitled to under the original orders dated 10.06.2016 or for such other period as they would be entitled to otherwise in law.
5. In the facts and circumstances, and because neither the learned AGA nor the counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.107531/2016 and the connected petitions are able to controvert that the impugned withdrawal is without notice to the concerned petitioners, it would be just and reasonable to dispose of both the writ petitions permitting the petitioners in W.P.No.105487/2016 to make a fresh application with the local T.B. Board Authority for grant of licence to draw from the backwater of Tunga - Bhadra as per Annexure C, C1, C2 and C3 (the earlier permissions granted to them) for such period as they would have been entitled to but for the impugned withdrawal or any other further period as could be permitted in law while calling upon the local T.B. Board Authority to consider such applications strictly in accordance with law without being influenced by the impugned withdrawal by the impugned orders of the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari District. Therefore, the writ petitions 9 in W.P.No.105487/2016 and in W.P.No.107531/2016 and the connected petitions are accordingly disposed of.
In view of the disposal of the main petitions, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE yan