Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Ganga Reddy vs The Deputy Commissioner And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|29 March, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.6632/2019(KLR-RES) BETWEEN SRI. GANGA REDDY SON OF LATE ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.18, KALKERE MAIN ROAD 5TH CROSS, SIR M.V.NAGAR 2ND BLOCK, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR BANGALORE-560016 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI R.R. DEVENDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT -563 130 2. TAHASILDHAR MULBAGALU TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563131 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE/ORDER DATED 09.01.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners herein are impugning the notice dated 9.1.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent - Tahsildar in proceedings bearing No.NCR.CR.53/2018-19, at Annexure-A.
2. A perusal of the notice impugned would indicate that the same is issued pursuant to the direction of this Court in WP.No.1551-14/2013 in calling upon the petitioner to vacate the encroached area of 25 guntas of land in Sy.No.352 of Kappalamadagu village, Kasaba Hobli, Mulbagal Taluk. Admittedly, the notice is only beginning of proceedings calling upon the petitioner to appear before the authority and to explain whether there is encroachment or otherwise. Therefore, the writ petition filed in challenging the same is premature in nature, hence the same cannot be entertained.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent – authority and to place all the material available with him in the form of statement of objections, based on which the proceedings initiated before the 2nd respondent authority would be disposed of in accordance with law. It is also made clear that the order that would be passed by the 2nd respondent is not final in itself and it is open for the petitioner to challenge the same in an appropriate forum.
Sd/- JUDGE nd/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Ganga Reddy vs The Deputy Commissioner And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
29 March, 2019
Judges
  • S N Satyanarayana