IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD W.P.No.24024 OF 2017(LB-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri. S.B. Manjunath, S/o.Basavakumar, Aged about 35 years, R/at Sulibele Village, Sulibele Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District-562101. … Petitioner (By Sri. Shivashankar K., Advocate) AND:
1. The Panchayath Development Officer, Sulibele Grama Panchayath, Sulibele, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District-562 101.
2. The Assistant Engineer, BESCOM, Sulible, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District-562101.
3. The Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayath, Hosakote Taluk, Hosakote, Bangalore Rural District. ... Respondents (By Sri.M.S.Devaraju, Advocate for R1 & 3: R2 served.) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the Grama Panchayath notice dated: 23.03.2017 vide at Annexure-H; quash the letter issued by the R-1 dated 23.03.2017 to R2 to disconnect the power at Annexure-J & etc.
This writ petition, coming on for Preliminary hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER This writ petition is directed against the order dated 23.03.2017 passed by the first respondent.
2. The petitioner has obtained licence in the year 2012 to run the Plaining and Wood Works. As per the conditions of the Panchayat he was running the said industry. In the year 2017, once again the licence has been granted subject to condition. Subsequently, without any notice, by the impugned order vide Annexure-H, the licence granted in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 17(3) before the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Hosakote Taluk. Since the appellate authority has not considered his case he has approached this Court challenging the impugned order vide Annexure-H dated 23.03.2017.
3. Sri M.S.Devaraju, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 submits that against the order passed vide Annexure-H dated 23.03.2017 the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. Secondly, he submits that Annexure-J is a consequential order issued pursuant to Anneuxre-H. Thirdly, he submits that as contended by the petitioner, if there is any appeal filed under the said Act, in accordance with law, the same shall be considered and appropriate order will be passed, if some reasonable time is granted.
4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has obtained the licence for running Plaining and Wood Works. By the impugned order vide Annexure-H dated 23.03.2017 the first respondent has cancelled the same. Being aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed an appeal before the third respondent Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayath. Since the same is pending before the third respondent, it is suffice for this Court to direct the respondent No.3 to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Cm/-
Sd/- JUDGE