IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK B. HINCHIGERI WRIT PETITION No.26503 OF 2017(GM-RES) BETWEEN :
Sri Narayana Murthy, Aged about 50 years, S/o.Late Patalappa, R/at Bettahalsoor Village, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru – 562 157. ... Petitioner (By Sri C.Amrutesh, Advocate) AND:
1. The Tahsildar, Bangalore North Taluk, Mini Vidhan Soudha, Yelahanka, Bengaluru – 560 064.
2. The Panchayat Development Officer, Bettahalsoor Graama Panchayat, Bettahalsoor, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru – 562 157.
3. The Health Officer, Primary Health Centre, Bettahalsoor, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru – 562 157. …Respondents (By Sri T.L.Kiran Kumar, AGA for R1 to R3) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order dated 6.6.2017 issued by the R1 marked as Annexure-A, and etc.
This writ petition, coming on for preliminary hearing ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner has called into question the notice, dated 06.06.2017 (Annexure-A), directing him to closedown the pig farming activities.
2. Sri C.Amrutesh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the impugned communication, dated 06.06.2017 (Annexure-A) is styled as notice, it is virtually an order only. He submits that no notice, no enquiry has preceded the issuance of the impugned order.
3. At the very outset, Sri T.L.Kiran Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that a fresh notice, dated 21.06.2017 is issued to the petitioner to produce the documents in support of his pig farming activity. He submits that if the petitioner files the objections within 7 days, the same would be considered and thereafter appropriate orders would be passed. He submits, on instructions, that the matter would not be precipitated in the meanwhile.
4. Recording the submissions of the learned advocates, I dispose of this petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit appropriate reply to the respondent No.1 within 7 days from today. If the petitioner files the reply within 7 days, the respondent No.1 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders. If the petitioner fails to submit the reply within 7 days, the respondent No.1 shall proceed further in the matter holding that the petitioner has nothing to say in the matter.
5. Until such time that the first respondent passes a fresh order in the matter, he shall not coerce the petitioner to stop the pig-farming activities.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-