IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR WRIT PETITION No.12396 OF 2016 (S-RES) Between:
Sri Ravi Kumar N S/o P Nanjundegowda Aged about 32 years R/at Kurubara Beedi Siddayana Pura Kollegala Taluk Chamarajanagar District-571440.
... Petitioner (By Sri. Prabhugoud B. Tumbigi, Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka Represented by its Chief Secretary Irrigation Department Vidhanasoudha-560 001.
2. The Deputy Commissioner Chamarajanagar District Chamarajanagar – 571313.
3. Chief Officer Pattana Panchayath Hanur Kollegala Taluk Chamarajanagar District-571440.
4. Managing Director Cauvery Neravari Nigam Cauvery Bhavan Bengaluru – 560 009.
... Respondents (By Sri. T S Mahanthesh – AGA for R-1, R-2 and R-3; Sri Murthy Dayanand Naik, Advocate for R-4) ****** This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to, direct the respondents to provide permanent government job to the petitioner in the Cauvery Water Supply Scheme as agreed by considering the representation of the petitioner vide Annexure-H.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ group, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGA for respondents 1 to 3 and the counsel for Respondent No.4.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a direction from the respondents to provide a permanent Government job to him in the Cauvery Water Supply Scheme as agreed, by considering the representation of the petitioner at Annexure-“H”.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the respondents had acquired their ancestral land bearing Sy.No.18/B3 measuring 2 acre 16 guntas of Linganapura village, Kollagala Sub-Division, Chamarajanagar District for the purpose of supplying Cauvery river water to the villages around Hanuru, on the assurance that the respondents would provide Government employment to one of their family members. The said resolution dated 16.07.2007 passed by the third respondent is produced at Annexure-“B”.
4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as agreed, the father of the petitioner had also executed a registered sale deed in respect of the land in favour of the first respondent vide sale deed dated 2.11.2007. But however, though the resolution has been passed as far back as on 16.07.2007, the same has not been given effect to by the respondents. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he has been provided employment by the respondents at the Water purification Plant at Siddayanapura on temporary basis, the respondents have not provided him a Government job as agreed in their resolution vide Annexure-“B”. His repeated requests for providing him a Government job at the earliest having gone in vain, the petitioner has come up in this writ petition seeking to implement the resolution.
5. Learned AGA appearing for Respondents 1 to 3 as well as the learned counsel for Respondent No.4 do not dispute the above position.
6. On a perusal of the documents on record relating to the submission made by the parties, I find that since the resolution has not been given effect to, it would be appropriate to issue necessary directions to the authorities concerned in this regard.
Hence, the respondents are hereby directed to consider the representation Annexure-“H” made by the petitioner herein before the third respondent, keeping in view the resolution at Annexure-“B” dated 16.07.2007 and thereafter pass appropriate orders on his representation, in accordance with law, however within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE KS