IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.36676/2018 (LB-RES) Between:
Smt. Shakila Banu, W/o Khalandar, Aged about 47 years, Residing at M.R. Nagar, M.K. Hatti Panchayat, Chitradurga Taluk and District.
(By Sri Siddappa B.M., Advocate) And:
… Petitioner 1. Panchayat Development Officer, M.K. Hatti Grama Panchayat, M.K. Hatti, Chitradurga Taluk and District – 577 523.
2. Sri M. Mahshwarappa, S/o Mahalingappa Aged about 62 years, Retd. Govt. Employee, Residing near Yellamma Temple, M.K. Hatty, Chitradurga Taluk and District – 577 523.
… Respondents (By Sri N. Praveen Kumar, Advocate for R1; Sri M.T. Jagan Mohan, Advocate for R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash notice issued by R-1 dated 4.8.2018 vide Annexure-H to writ petition and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner has challenged the notice at Annexure-H dated 04.08.2018 issued by the first respondent–M.K.Hatti Grama Panchayat stating that the petitioner is to vacate and hand over the possession of property which is a subject-matter of consideration in the present petition within a period of three days of receipt of impugned notice, in light of the order passed by Lokayukta.
2. It is clear that the direction issued by Lokayukta will have to be put into effect by following due process as prescribed in law. It is to be noticed that the assertion of respondent No.1 on the basis of the complaint of respondent No.2, is that the petitioner has encroached upon public property. In light of the said assertion, necessary action is to be initiated in accordance with Section 72(2) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (‘the Act’ for brevity) in the event seeks to recover possession. The direction of Lokayukta is to the effect that Panchayat Authorities were called upon to show cause as to what action has been taken under Section 72(2) of the Act. Pursuant to the said order of Lokayukta at Annexure-G, it is clear that impugned notice at Annexure-H is issued by the Grama Panchayat to the petitioner. The notice at Annexure-H is not sustainable, as the same is not preceded by any statutory enquiry as required.
3. Taking note of the procedure provided for removal of encroachment under Section 72 of the Act, notice at Annexure-H is set aside reserving liberty to respondent No.1 to take action in accordance with law, in specific, under Section 72(2) of the Act, if facts on hand make out a case for initiating such proceedings.
Needless to state that once proceedings are initiated, the petitioner is to be afforded an opportunity and principles of natural justice be observed in such enquiry to be held.
4. Petition is accordingly disposed of, subject to above observations.
5. In view of disposal of the main matter, I.A.Nos.1/2019 and 2/2019 are dismissed as having become redundant.
Sd/- JUDGE VGR