IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 14231/2018 (KLR-RES-PIL) BETWEEN:
1.KRISHNA S/O SANJEEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 2.GOPALA S S/O SHETTYGOWDA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 3.KRISHNEGOWDA S/O RAJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 4.CHANDRA S/O KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 5.NINGARAJU S/O APPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 6.YOGESHA C S/O CHANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 7.MANJU S/O GOVINDAIAH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS 8.VASANTHAKUMARA S/O GOPALAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 9.SHIVAKUMARA S/O RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 10.VENKATESHA S/O SWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 11.PAVAN S/O BOREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS 12.SWAMY S/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 13.KRISHNEGOWDA S/O MANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 14.CHANDRA S/O HUCHCHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 15.JAVARAIAH S/O HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 16.SWAMYGOWDA S/O KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 17.RANGEGOWDA S/O SUBBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 18.SHIVANNA S/O SANNATHIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 19.GOPALA C S/O CHALUVASHETTY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 20.DANAPPA S/O CHALUVASHETTY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 21.O.K. KRISHNA S/O HUCHCHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 22.RAMEGOWDA S/O AKKANNAGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 23.KRISHNEGOWDA S/O DODDATHIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 24.LOKESHA S/O SANNATHIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 25.KUMARA S/O LAKKAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 26.RANGASWAMY S/O SWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 27.D. DEVARAJA S/O DYAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 28.O.R. HARISHA S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 29.DEVARAJA S/O KEREGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 30.N. NAGESHA S/O NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 31.YOGESHA S/O LAKKEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS ALL ARE R/OF ODANAHALLI VILLAGE HALLIMYSURU HOBALI HOLENARASIPURA TALUKU HASSAN DISTRICT-573 210 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI K R LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND 1.STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN-573 201 3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN-573 201 4.THE TAHASILDHAR HOLENARASIPURA TALUKU HASSAN DISTRICT-573 211 5.PUTTAMMA W/O KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 6.KALEGOWDA S/O HONNALIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 7.RANGEGOWDA S/O KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 8.MANJEGOWDA S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 9.SUBBEGOWDA S/O SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 10.YASHODHAMMA W/O TAMMANNAGOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 11.BASAVARAJU S/O EEREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 12.EEREGOWDA S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 13.KENGEGOWDA S/O HONNALIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 14.PUTTANANJAMMA W/O RAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R-5 TO 14 ARE R/A BOPANAHALLI VILLAGE HALLIMYSURU HOBALI HOLENARASIPURA TALUKU HASSAN DISTRICT-573 210 15.PAAPEGOWDA S/O JAVAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 16.SHANKAREGOWDA S/O MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R-15 & 16 ARE R/AT ODANAHALLI VILLAGE HALLIMYSURU HOBALI HOLENARASIPURA TALUKU HASSAN DISTRICT-573 210 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI D NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 TO 4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICES ISSUED UNDER FORM NO.54 BY RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURES-D AND D1 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners, who are the villagers, have filed this public interest litigation seeking to quash notices issued under Form No.54 by respondent No.4.
2. By the said notices, objections were called from the public before granting the lands situated in Sy.Nos.15, 16 and 18 of Odanahalli Village, Holenarasipura Taluk, Hassan District, in favour of respondent Nos.5 to 16. Petitioners submitted their objections stating that the said lands are gomal lands, which are required for grazing their cattle and respondent Nos.15 and 16 are unauthorisedly cultivating the said lands. Petitioners contend that without considering their objections, the respondents are proceeding to regularize unauthorised cultivation of the gomal lands, which is contrary to Rule 97 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966.
3. Shri D.Nagaraj, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondents, submits that only notices are issued and grant orders are not passed and hence, this petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed. He, however, submitted that the objections filed by the petitioners would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. In view of the submission made by learned Additional Government Advocate, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the objections filed by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six months. While considering the objections, the respondents shall keep in mind the provisions of Rule 97, which provides that adequate land has to be provided for free pasturage on the basis of population of cattle.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE bkv