IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD W.P.Nos.12609-12612 OF 2016(LB-RES) BETWEEN:
Dr.Shankaranarayana Udupa, S/o Late. Ramakrishna Udupa, Aged about 64 years, Residing at “Sudarshana”, Post Subramanya, Sullia Taluk, D.K.-574238. … Petitioner (By Sri. Praveen Kumar K.N., Advocate) AND:
1. The Chief Executive Officer, Udupi Jilla Panchayath Rajathadri ‘C’ Block, District office Complex, Manipala-576104.
2. The Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayath, Kundapura, Udupi District Post, Kundapura-576201.
3. The PDO/Secretary, Village Panchayath, Beejadi, P.O.Koteshwara, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi District, Beejadi-576 222.
4. Sri.Anantha Padmanabha Udupa, S/o Late. Ramakrishna Udupa, Aged about 67 years, Residing at Doddoni Road, Bejadi Village and Koteshwara Post, Kundapura Taluk Udupi District Beejadi-576 222. ... Respondents (By Sri.Jayakara Shetty, Advocate for R3: Sri. Vigneshwar S. Shasthri, Advocate for R4: R1 & R2 are served but unrepresented.) These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned proceedings dated:29.04.2015, and report made by R-3 having No.132/2015-16 dated:30.05.2015 vide Annexure-L & N consequently the report of -2 dated:17.06.2015 vide Annexure-P and etc.
These writ petitions, coming on for Preliminary hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER In these writ petitions, the petitioner has sought for quashing of Annexures E, N and P.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he has acquired the property bearing Sy.No.22/3 measuring 1 acre 14 ½ cents and 22/4 measuring 35 cents in Beejadi Village, Kundapura Taluk by a partition deed in the year 1986. Subsequently, the petitioner has filed an application for entering his name in the katha register in respect of the house. The application is for amalgamation of katha in respect of house Nos.4/77/1 and 4/77/2 situated in Sy.No.22/4 being one number. Pursuant to his request, by Annexure-D the Grama Panchayath has effected the katha and given a single number as 4/77. Being aggrieved by the same, the fourth respondent herein has filed a representation seeking for two door numbers for two different houses as it existed before passing Annexure-D. On the request made by the fourth respondent Annexure-E has been passed and two different numbers have been given as 4/77/1 and 4/77/2. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has given a representation to the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner, in turn, directed the Grama Panchayat to consider the case of the petitioner. The Grama Panchayath vide letter dated 30.05.2015 vide Annexure-N has clarified that there is a civil dispute between the parties and the Grama Panchayath has submitted same report to the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat. In turn, the Taluk Panchayat vide Annexure-P communicated the same to the Zilla Panchayat. Hence, the petitioner sought for quashing of Annexures E, N and P.
3. Sri K.N.Praveen Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that on the request of the petitioner Annexure-D has been passed by the third respondent Panchayat. Being aggrieved by the same, the fourth respondent has remedy to file an appeal under Section 269 of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short, ‘the said Act’). Instead of challenging the same he has approached the very same authority, i.e., the third respondent Panchayat. The third respondent without authority of law has passed the order changing the house Nos. into 4/77/1 and 4/77/2. This order is passed without jurisdiction and without giving any notice to the petitioner. Secondly, he contended that on his complaint to the Deputy Commissioner, on the directions of the Deputy Commissioner Grama Panchayath has written a letter to the Taluk Panchayat communicating that there is a civil dispute between the parties vide Annexure-N. The Taluk Panchayat has communicated to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat regarding the civil dispute. The civil dispute which is pending before this Court in RFA No.2565/2006 is nothing to do with the property in dispute. Hence, he sought for allowing the writ petition.
4. Per contra, Sri Vigneshwara S.Shastri, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 submitted that before passing the impugned order at Annexure-D the house in dispute having two house numbers 4/77/1 and 4/77/2. While passing Annexure-D the Panchayat has not given any notice to the fourth respondent. Without giving any notice Annexure-D is passed. He further submitted that civil dispute which is pending before this Court in RSA is also related to the very same property and He further submitted that he had the benefit of injunction order passed by the civil Court. Hence, he requests for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the writ papers.
6. It is not in dispute that the house bearing No.4/77/1 and 4/77/2 situated in land bearing Sy.No.22/4. Before passing the order at Annexure-D, this house has been given two numbers. On request of the petitioner, vide Annexure-D the Grama Panchayat has given a single number as 4/77. Annexure- D is passed without giving any notice to respondent No.4. Since the fourth respondent is also one of the interested person in the property in dispute, without giving any notice Annexure-D has been passed.
7. Annexure-E which is passed by the Grama Panchayat on the request of the fourth respondent is passed without jurisdiction. Once an order has been passed by the Grama Panchayath it has no authority to review its own order and Annenxure-E is passed without giving any notice to the petitioner. Both the Annexures D and E are passed contrary to the provisions of law and without giving notice to the interested persons. Under these circumstances, even though Annexure-D is not challenged, in view of the above finding, both Annexures D and E are unsustainable. Hence, Annexures D and E are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the same are quashed. Since Annexures N and P are consequential orders the same are also quashed. The matter is remanded back to the third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner after giving notice to both the parties and after hearing the parties, appropriate order shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. All rights of the parties are kept open.
8. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-