Karnataka High Court
Raju Yamanappa Myageri vs The Executive Engineer on 13 June, 2019
Author: S G Pandit
Bench: S.G. Pandit
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13 T H DAY OF JUNE 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
W.P. NOS. 102998-103022/2018 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. RAJU YAMANAPPA MYAGERI
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
2. ANAND PARASAPPA MYAGERI
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
3. MUTTAWWA W/O KALAPPA MYAGERI
AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK & AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
4. SUBRAI PARASAPPA MYAGERI
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
5. YESHWANT SHETTAPPA MYAGERI
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
6. SHIVAJI RAMAPPA MUNAVALI
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
7. CHANDRAKANT BALAPPA HARIJAN
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
8. RAMESH SHETTAPPA MADAR
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
9. SM,T.GAYATRI KEMPANNA HARIJAN @ TELAGERI
AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE & HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
10. SIDRAM MALLAPPA MELAVANKI
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
11. BHIMSHI SHIVARAI MADAR
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
12. SEVANTHA W/O BALAPPA TALWAR
AGE: 29 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE & HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
13. SANJU YESHWANTH MYAGERI
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
3
14. SHIVAPPA SOUDAPPA GADIWADDAR
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
15. KEMPANNA JANAPPA HARIJAN
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
16. SUNDAR BHIMAPPA KONKANI
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
17. KALAPPA SIDDAPPA SANADI
AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
18. VITTAL BIRASIDA PUJARI
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
19. SURESH SHIVALING KALLIMANI
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
20. SHANOOR IMAMSAB BISTI
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
21. MOHAMMEDHANIF IMAMSAB BISTI
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
4
22. MAHANING SHETTAPPA MYAGERI
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
23. SANTRAM KALLAPPA MUTTEPPAGOL
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
24. MARUTI KADAPPA GUDAJ
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
25. SHIVAPPA YALLAPPA PUJERI
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
26. APPANNA LAXMAN GADIWADDAR
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
27. YALLAPPA BADAPPA GADIWADDAR
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
28. PARVATI RENUKA HARIJAN
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
29. SHAMIL JAYAVANT MUTTEPPAGOL
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
5
30. VIRUPAKSHI BASAVANNI YALIGAR
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
31. GEETA D/O SHRISHAIL GANJI
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & ADVOCATE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
32. YAMANAPPAYESHWANT MYAGERI
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
33. VEERBHADRA MAILANNAVAR
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
34. YESHWANT S/O JAYAWANT GASTI
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
35. PRAKASH S/O BASAPPA KADAKOL
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: DHUPDAL VILLAGE-591218,
TQ: GOKAK.
- PETI TIONERS
(BY SRI.V.M.SHEELVANT AND
SRI.VINAY S.KOUGALAGI, ADVS)
AND:
1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LIMITED,
G L B C DIVISION NO.1,
GHATAPRABHA-591306,
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
6
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BELAGAVI.
3. THE THASILDAR
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, GOKAK,
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GIRISH HIREGOUDAR, ADV. FOR R1,
SRI.RAVI V.HOSMANI, AGA FOR R2 AND R3)
THESE WRIT PETI TIONS ARE FI LED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTI TUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS
FROM DISPOSSESSING THE PETITIONERS FROM
THE LAND UNDER THEIR CULTIVATION IN
SY.NO.120 MEASURING 82 ACRES 12 GUNTAS OF
DUPHDAL VILLAGE IN GOKAK TALUKA & ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
7
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a mandamus to restrain the respondents from dispossessing the petitioners from the land under their cultivation in Sy. No. 120 measuring 2 acres of Dhupdal village, Gokak Taluk and also from demolishing the petitioners' houses situated in the said land, without due process of law.
2. The petitioners claim that they are in possession and enjoyment of the land bearing Sy. No. 120 totally measuring 2 acres out of 82 acres 12 guntas of Dhupdal village in Gokak Taluk. It is stated that they are cultivating the said land for the last 40 years and developed the land by investing huge money and hard labour. Further, the petitioners stated that they have 8 constructed houses in the land in question. The respondent No.1 issued notice dated 28.12.2017 to the petitioners u/S 4(1) of The Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1974 (for short 'Act'). The petitioners replied to the said notice explaining their right over the properties and requested not to evict them. In the meanwhile they approached this Court apprehending demolition of their houses under threat of dispossession. This Court, by order dated 26.04.2018 directed notice to the respondents and further directed to maintain statusquo and permitted the respondents to go on with the proceedings initiated under the Act.
3. The respondents on appearance, filed statement of objection contending that the land in Sy. No. 120 measuring 82 acres 12 guntas 9 was acquired by the Government during the year 1949-55 for construction of canals, offices, quarters and explosive material storage godowns, etc. for Public Works Department. Now the said land has been handed over to Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (for short 'KNNL'). Along with the statement of objections, the respondent No.1 has produced few orders passed under the Act after holding enquiry.
4. This Court had permitted the respondent No.1 to proceed with the proceedings initiated under the Act. In pursuance to the said order, the respondent No.1 has conducted proceedings and passed final order u/S 5 of the Act. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also not dispute the passing of the order u/S 5 of the Act.
10
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, so as to enable the petitioners to file appeal as provided u/S 10 of the Act, they may be given some time to file appeal and he prays for an order not to dispossess them till they file appeal before the District Court u/S 10 of the Act.
6. Taking note of the fact that the respondent No.1 has already passed order u/S 5 of the Act and against the order passed u/S 5 of the Act, an appeal is provided u/S 10 of the Act. Sec. 10 of the Act reads as follows:
10. Appe als.- ( 1) An appe al shall lie f rom every order of the co mpe ten t of f icer made in respect of any public pre mises under section 5 or sectio n 7 to an appe llate of f icer who shall be the Dis tr ic t Judge, hav ing jur isd iction over the are a.
(2) An appe al und er sub-section (1) shall be pref erred,-
( i) in the case of an appe al f rom
an order under section 5 with in thir ty
11
days f rom the date of af f ix ture of the
order under sub-sectio n (1) of that sectio n; and ( ii) in the case of an appe al f rom an order under section 7 with in thir ty days f rom the d ate on which the order is co mmunicated to the appellant:
Prov ided that the appe llate of f icer may enter tain the appeal af ter the e xpir y of the said per iod of thir ty d ays, if he is s atisf ied that the appellant was prevented by suf f icien t cause f rom f iling the appe al in time.
(3) Where an appeal is pref erred f rom an order of the co mpe te nt of f icer, the appellate off icer may s tay the enf orce men t of that or der f or such per iod and on such cond itio ns as he dee ms f it.
(4) Every appe al under this section s hall be d isposed of by the appellate off icer as exped itious ly as poss ible.
(5) The cos t of any appe al under this section shall be in the d iscre tion of the appellate off icer.
- - -
7. The petitioners will have to file an appeal before the District Court as provided under the above provision. Hence, the writ petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file appeal as provided u/S 10 of the Act. 12
8. The interim order granted on 26.04.2018 is continued for a period of 30 days from today so as to enable the petitioners to file appeal as provided u/S 10 of the Act.
With the above, the writ petitions are disposed of.
In view of disposal of the petitions, I.A. No. 1/2019 also stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE bv v