IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.3237/2019(LB-RES) BETWEEN:
MANOHAR NAGAPPA NAIK S/O LATE. NAGAPPA NAIK AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/AT HOUSE NO.726, 8TH MAIN 7TH SECTOR H.S.R. LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 034.
(BY SRI.P. M. NAYAK, ADV.) AND 1. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYAT KUMTA KUMTA-581 343 UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER 2. PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GRAMA PANCHAYAT VALAGALLY KUMTA TALUK-581 343 UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS (R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED BUT UN REPESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ON THEIR FILES FROM THE RESPNDENTS AS IT RELATES TO THE CASE ON HAND AND ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION DATED 29.08.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-D TO THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITINER SEEKING FOR TO SET ASIDE THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING OF THE PANCHAYAT HELD ON 08.06.2018 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Respondents are served, but remained un- represented.
2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
a) Issue Writ of Mandamus to the 1st Respondent to consider the Application dated:29.08.2018 vide Annexure-D to the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner seeking for to set aside the proceedings of the meeting of the Panchayat held on 08.06.2018;
b) Direct the Respondents to pass appropriate Order in so far as it related to the Application of the Petitioner seeking for Certificate of the 2nd Respondent Panchayat for the conversion of his 5 guntas land situated at Sy. No.34/4 of Harodi Village for residential purpose;
c) Pass any other appropriate Order as to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The case of the petitioner is that his application for issuing “no objection certificate” for conversion of land from the respondent No.2- Panchayath was rejected by passing a resolution dated 8.6.2018. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal dated 29.8.2018 before the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat under Section 235 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short “the Act”) vide Annexure-D. Since the respondent has not considered his appeal, he has filed this petition seeking direction to the respondent No.1 to consider his appeal.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Panchayat has addressed a letter dated 28.7.2018 to the petitioner enclosing the copy of the resolution passed on 8.6.2018 vide Annexure-C wherein the petitioner’s request for issuing ‘no objection certificate’ is rejected. Against that order, the petitioner has a remedy of appeal under Section 269 of the said Act. Therefore, he submits that he may be permitted to challenge the same before the competent authority.
4. Since the petitioner has remedy of appeal under Section 269 of the said Act, the prayer sought in this writ petition will not survive for consideration. Hence, the petitioner is permitted to challenge the resolution dated 8.6.2018 vide Annexure-C by filing an appeal before the competent authority within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If such an appeal is filed by the petitioner before the competent authority, the competent authority is directed to consider the same in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of filing of the appeal.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE DM