IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.29070 OF 2019 AND WRIT PETITION NOS.2995-2997 OF 2019(GM - TEN) BETWEEN:
1. MALLESH H., S/O LATE HONNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, HALEPETE, HULIYURU DURGA, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 123.
2. MR.HARISH H.C., S/O CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, HALEPETE, HULIYURU DURGA, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 123.
3. MR.HONNAPPA, S/O LATE RAMACHANDRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, HALEPETE, HULIYURU DURGA, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 123.
4. MR.HUCHIRAIAH, S/O LATE BADREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, HALEPETE, HULIYURU DURGA, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 123.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT [PWD], & PWP AND IWTD, (PUBLIC WORK PORTS AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT], VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DEPARTMENT OF PWD & PWP AND IWTD, TUMKUR DIVISION, TUMKURU – 572 101.
3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DEPARTMENT OF PWD & PWP AND IWTD, KUNIGAL SUB DIVISION, KUNIGAL – 572 130.
(BY SRI. E. S. INDIRESH, AGA) … RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 03.07.2017 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE – A ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER R-2 AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. G. Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri. E. S. Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
These petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.
2. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia have assailed the validity of the tender notification dated 03.07.2017 vide Annexure-A issued by respondent No.2.
3. When these matters were taken up today, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that in pursuance of the impugned tender notification, road has already been constructed and therefore, the challenge to the tender notification has been rendered infructuous.
4. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while constructing the road in question, the respondents have utilized the land belonging to the petitioners without acquiring the same and they be granted liberty to submit a fresh representation to the competent authority with regard to their grievance.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that in case such a representation is submitted, suitable action in accordance with law shall be taken.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, these writ petitions are disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners that in case, the petitioners submit a representation before the competent authority with regard to their grievance for construction of the road on the land belonging to them without payment of compensation, the same shall be dealt with by the competent authority in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such a representation.
Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-