IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.23590/2016 (GM-CC) BETWEEN:
SRI. D. KRISHNAPPA S/O. LATE DASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, # 140, NARASIPURA LAYOUT, VIDHYARANYAPURA POST, BANGALORE-560 097. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRA MOHAN K, ADV.) AND:
1. MARASANDRA MUNIYAPPA, BAHUJAN BHAVAN, # 23, NETAJI ROAD, NEAR CONTONMENT RAILWAY STATION, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 051.
2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DIRECTORATE CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT, F BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009.
3. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DIRECTORATE CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATI NAGAR, B BLOCK, DAVANGERE-577 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C. JAGADEESH SPL. GA FOR R2 & R3; SRI. D.A. SHIVAKUMAR, ADV. FOR R-1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 28.03.2016 ISSUED BY R-3 AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is before this Court assailing the notice dated 28.03.2016 impugned at Annexure-B to the petition.
2. The petitioner contends that though he belongs to scheduled caste community, without there being a justification, the respondent No.1 has raised certain objections with regard to the same. It is pointed out that the proceedings in any event has already been initiated through the notice dated 25.02.2015 before the Directorate Civil Rights Enforcement, Bengaluru. Despite the said proceedings having been initiated, a notice dated 28.03.2016 as at Annexure-B is issued by the Directorate Civil Rights Enforcement, Davanagere. It is contended that the petitioner being a resident of Bengaluru would respond to the proceedings pending before the Directorate Civil Rights Enforcement, Bengaluru and as such, the notice as at Annexure-B issued to him initiating parallel proceedings is not justified.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 would submit that there are sufficient documents to indicate that the petitioner does not belong to the community for which he has obtained a certificate wrongfully and since the petitioner despite being notified in the proceedings before the Directorate Civil Rights Enforcement, Bengaluru has not participated therein, the proceedings as at Annexure-B was initiated.
4. Be that as it may, insofar as the merits of the rival contentions between the petitioner and the respondents, the same need not be gone into in the instant petition. However, the only consideration herein is as to whether the parallel proceedings as has been initiated through the notice as at Annexure-B is justified.
To the said extent, since it is submitted on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner has not chosen to appear in the proceedings which was initiated through the notice dated 25.02.2015, it is made clear that even if the petitioner does not choose to appear therein, the official respondents may proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
5. However, the notice dated 28.03.2016 at this juncture would not be justified. Accordingly, the same is quashed. It is made clear that the petitioner shall appear in response to the notice dated 25.02.2015 in the proceedings pending before the Directorate Civil Rights Enforcement, Bengaluru and put forth his contentions whereupon a consideration shall be made in accordance with law. Since, the date as indicated in the notice dated 25.02.2015 has elapsed, the petitioner shall now appear without any further notice being issued, before the Authority who had issued the notice dated 25.02.2015, on 18.12.2017 at 3.00 p.m. as the first date and thereafter, the further proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with law.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST