IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 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.6928/2018 (GM-RES) PIL BETWEEN:
1. MANNAEKHELLI TALUKU RACHANE HORATA SAMEETI AN ASSOCIATION OF PERSONS MANNAEKHELLI BIDAR DISTRICT-585 227 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI. DR. SAMBANNA 2. SRI. DR. SAMBANNA S/O LAXMAN DANDIN AGE:61 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MEDICAL PRACTITIONER (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) R/O MANNAEKHELLI, TQ: HUMANABAD DISTRICT BIDAR-585 227 3. SRI. VEERASHETTY S/O DASHARATHKUMBAR AGE:46 YEARS, OCCUPATION :JOURNALIST R/O MANNAEKHELLI, TQ: HUMANABAD DISTRICT BIDAR-585 227 4. SRI. MD. MASTANALI S/O MD. KASIMSAB NAGANKERA AGE:52 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURIST R/O MANNAEKHELLI, TQ: HUMANABAD DISTRICT BIDAR-585 227 5. SRI MOHAMMAD VAZEER S/O MAINUDDIN PATEL AGE:42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O MANGALAGI, TQ: HUMANABAD DISTRICT BIDAR-585 227 …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI. V.S. MOHAREKAR FOR SHRI. S.B. MATHAPATI, ADVOCATES) AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE DIRECTOR CELL FOR CREATION OF REVENUE VILLAGES AND EX-OFFICIO DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 3. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER MINI VIDHANASOUDHA, STATION ROAD KALBURGI-585 102 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BIDAR DISTRICT BIDAR-585 401 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. S.H. PRASHANTH, AGA) . . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH NOTIFICATION DTD 01.12.2017 PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL GAZETTEE ON 07.12.2017 VIDE ANNX-A AND QUASH NOTIFICATION DTD 19.1.2018 PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL GAZETTEE ON 20.1.2018 VIDE ANNX-H.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R This public interest litigation is presented with prayers inter alia to quash Notification dated January 19, 2018 (gazetted on January 20, 2018) whereunder ManyEkhelli village falling in Bemalkheda Circle has been excluded from the limits of Humnabad Taluk and included in the newly constituted Chitguppa Taluk in Bidar District; and to direct the respondents to consider petitioner’s representations to constitute ManyEkhelli village as a Taluk.
2. Shri.V.S.Moharekar learned Advocate for petitioner submitted that ManyEkhelli village is located at a distance of 28 kms. from Humnabad which is already a Taluk Headquarter. ManyEkhelli is a prominent village with a tax collection of Rs.1 crore by the Grama Panchayat. It is situated within 5 kms. from the Karanja project. Thus, there is no scarcity of water in the village. Hence, viewed from any angle, ManyEkhelli is best suited to be declared as a Taluk. However, by Notification dated January 19, 2018 the State Government have excluded villages which fell under Bemalkheda Circle from Humnabad Taluk and included them in the newly formed Chitguppa Taluk. He argued that State have not objectively considered petitioners’ representations to constitute ManyEkhelli village as a Taluk. Accordingly, he prays that the impugned notification be quashed and directions be issued to the respondents to consider petitioners’ representations.
3. Shri. S.H.Prashanth, learned AGA for the State contended that constituting a Taluk is a policy matter. The State Government had issued Notification under Section 4 of the Karnataka Land Act, 1964 (Karnataka Act 12 of 1964) proposing to constitute Chitguppa Taluk and called for objections. After considering all the relevant aspects Chitguppa has been constituted as a Taluk and villages falling in Bemalkheda Circle have been included in Chitguppa Taluk. He placed reliance on a decision of this Court in Hulsoor Assembly Constituency Vs. State of Karnataka and others (W.P. No.29102/2018) decided on August 8, 2018 in support of his contention.
4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the records.
5. This Court in Hulsoor Assembly Constituency has held as follows:
“The power to constitute Talukas or altering their boundaries although statutory, is a matter essentially touching the policy of the State which the Government of the day in its wisdom devices, keeping in view, several factors which are not ordinarily susceptible to judicial review. The Court has to show due deference to the policy decisions of the other branches of the State. Ordinarily, the writ Courts do not intervene in such matters unless glaring errors of highest magnitude are apparent and collective grievance of the people is legally reddressible. When the opinion is formed by the Executive in exercise of statutory power after taking into account all relevant factors, ordinarily, this Court will not upset the same inasmuch as it cannot run a race of opinions with the statutory authority, unless breach of binding rule of conduct is apparent.”
6. Having carefully considered the rival submissions and having perused the records, in our view there is no legal infirmity in the impugned order constituting Chitaguppa Taluk. In the result, this petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE SPS