IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD W.P.No.23233 OF 2018(LB-RES) BETWEEN:
R.Vishwanath Poojary, S/o.Gudda Poojary, Aged Major, Kalpane House, Kulavooru Village, Kuppepadav Post, Mangalore Taluk, D.K.District – 574 114. … Petitioner (By Sri Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Department of Revenue, Vidhana Soudha, Bangaluru – 560 001, Rep. by Chief Secretary.
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Dakshina Kannada District, Mangalore – 575 001.
3. Panchayath Development Officer, Mutthur Village Panchayath, Mangalore Taluk, D.K.District – 574 219.
4. The Tahasildar, Mangalore Taluk, D.K.District – 574 219.
5. Harshad, S/o.B.Ibrahim, Aged Major, Kulavoor Village, Kuppepadav Post, Mangalore Taluk, D.K.District – 574 144. ... Respondents (By Sri M.A.Subramani, GP for R1, R2 & R4: R3 served and unrepresented:
Vide order dated 05.08.2019, notice to R5 held sufficient) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct R1 to R4 to take suitable action pursuant to the representation made by the petitioner vide Annexures A to C and etc.
This writ petition, coming on for preliminary hearing ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER In this writ petition the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to the respondents No.1 to 4 to take suitable action pursuant to the representations made by the petitioner vide Annexures A to C;
(ii) Issue any other writ or order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The petitioner is the owner of the land bearing Sy.No.7/4 of Kulavoor Village, Kuppepadavu Post, Mangalore. The petitioner made representations to respondent No.3 On 08.01.2018 vide Annexure-A, to the respondent No.4 on 20.03.2018 vide Annexure-B and to respondent No.2 on 20.03.2018 vide Annexure-C stating that the respondent No.5 has encroached the public canal and requesting for taking the necessary action. Pursuant to the said representations the third respondent has issued notice dated 23.01.2018 to the fifth respondent vide Annexure-D calling upon him to remove the mud which is stored and to clear the channel. Apart from issuing the notice to the fifth respondent the third respondent has not taken any action. Hence, the petitioner has given one more representation vide Annexure-E dated 23.03.2018. Inspite of that, respondent No.3 has not taken any action. Hence, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court.
3. Inspite of the petitioner giving number of representations to respondent No.3, the last representation being at Annexure-E, the third respondent has not considered the representations of the petitioner. Hence, it is suffice for this Court to direct the respondent No.3 to consider the repetition in accordance with law.
4. Accordingly, respondent No.3 is directed to consider the representation at Annexure-E submitted by the petitioner dated 23.03.2018 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-