IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.30654/2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
NAGAPPA GOWDA S/O KORAGAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT MANDEKARA HOUSE AITHOOR VILLAGE, SUNKADAKATTE P.O. KADABA TALUK D.K. DISTRICT – 574 238.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI SRIKANTH N.V., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOREST DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-1.
2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE MANGALORE, D.K. – 575 002.
3. THYAGARAJ RANGE FOREST OFFICER SUBRAHMANYA RANGE, KARNATAKA FOREST DEPARTMENT FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, SUBRAHMANYA VILLAGE AND P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K. DIST – 574 221.
4. MUSTHAFA RANGE FOREST OFFICER, KFDC, SUBRAHMANYA UNIT FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, KADABA VILLAGE AND P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221.
5. CHARAN RANGE FOREST OFFICER, KFDC, SUBRAHMANYA UNIT FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, AITHOOR VILLAGE, MARDALA P.O. KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221 6. NAVEEN KUMAR FORESTER - SUNKADAKATTE UNIT, KARNATAKA FOREST DEPARTMENT FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, AITHOOR VILLAGE, SUNKADAKATTE P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221.
7. ASHOKA FOREST GUARD - BILINELE WEST BEAT KARNATAKA FOREST DEPAPRTMENT AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, BILINELE VILLAGE AND P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221.
8. MALATHESH FOREST GUARD BILINELE WEST BEAT KARNATAKA FOREST DEPARTMENT AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, BILINELE VILLAGE AND P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221 9. THYAGARAJA DRIVER, KFDC FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 72-CRC QUARTERS AITHOOR VILLAGE, SUNKADAKATTE P.O.
KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221 10. SHEENAPPA GOWDA FOREST GUARD-AITHOOR BEAT KARNATAKA FOREST DEPARTMENT FATHERS NAME NOT KNWON AGED 55 YEARS, AITHOOR VILLAGE, SUNKADAKATTE P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221 11. BASAVARAJ FOREST GUARD-RENJILADY BEAT KARNATAKA FOREST DEPARTMENT FATHERS NAME NOT KNWON AGED 25 YEARS, RENJILADY VILLAGE AND P.O KADABA TALUK, D.K.DIST – 574 221.
(BY SRI B. BALAKRISHNA, AGA FOR R1-2) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT DATED 6.4.2019 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND TAKE SUITABLE ACTION AGAINST THE R-3 TO 9 FOR THE ACT OF WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT OF THE PETITIONER AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri Srikanth N.V., for Sri Sachin B.S., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri B.Balakrishna, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondent Nos.3 to 11.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
“i) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to consider the complaint dated 6.4.2019 as per Annexure-A and take suitable action against the respondents No.3 to 9 for the act of wrongful confinement of the petitioner.
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents No.3 to 9 to pay the damages for sum of Rs.25,00,000/- for wrongful confining the petitioner.
iii) Issue any other writ or order or direction that deems fit to grants in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that being aggrieved the petitioner has filed a complaint against respondent Nos.3 to 9 before respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 be directed to decide the representation which has been submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that suitable action in accordance with law shall be taken.
6. In view of the submission made and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to take action on the complaint which has been filed by the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ca