IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.53675/2017 (GM-KLA) BETWEEN:
SRI CHANNARAYAPPA S/O LATE ARAGALUGANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/O ALAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI UDAYA KUMAR .G. ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE UPA LOKAYUKTA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE-560 001 4. THE TAHASILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK HOSAKOTE BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 5. D.A.MUNIVENKATAPPA S/O DODDA APPAIAH ALAGONDAHALLI JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK DODDANALLALA POST BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE HOSKOTE TOWN AND RURAL POLICE STATION HOSKOTE-562 114 ...RESPONDENTS (BY MS.SHWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR R2, R3, R4 & R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURES-A AND B WHICH ARE IMPUGNED PROCEEDING BEFORE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 16.07.2016 AND COMPLAINT COPY DATED 19.07.2016 ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Ag.CJ (Oral):
1. Heard. MS.Shwetha Krishnappa, learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions from respondent No.4 who is present before Court, submits that the impugned notice bearing No.M.A.G.C.R:203/2016-17 dated 13.10.2017 (Annexure-C) issued by respondent No.4 namely, the Tahsildar, Hosakote Taluk, does not relate to the land bearing Survey No.1/p64 measuring 1 acre. In view of this clarification, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that no further order is necessary in this writ petition.
2. In view of the above, the impugned notice dated 13.10.2017 (Annexure-C) issued by respondent No.4 shall not be construed as preventing the petitioner from having ingress and egress to his aforesaid land measuring 1 acre. Further, this order shall not be construed as declaring title or possession of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid land. If there is any dispute in respect of title or possession, this order will not come in the way of the aggrieved party to approach the jurisdictional Civil Court.
Petition disposed of.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE bkv