IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION Nos.19727-19745 OF 2015 (LB - RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. S. RAGHAVENDRA, S/O G. SHIVASHANKARACHARI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, SRI VISHWAKARMA JEWELLERS, KHATHA NO.262/2/232/2.
2. SRI. S. RAVINDRAKUMAR, S/O G. SHIVASHANKARACHARI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, SRI VISHWAKARMA JEWELLERS KHATHA NO.853/764, 855/766/1 + 855/3/766/3, 3. SRI. I. ESHWARA, S/O LATE I. GOPALARAMAIAH SETTY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, KHATHA NO.746/668 4. SRI. A.L. PRAVEEN, S/O LAKSHMIPATHAIAH SETTY, AGED 28 YEARS, ALANKAR NOVELTIES, KHATHA NO.264/4/246 5. SRI. M KRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE MALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, SUMITHRA GENERAL STORES KHATHA NO.502/452 6. SMT.KAMALAMMA, W/O H.G. GURUMURTHYCHARI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, VENKATESHWARA JEWELLERY WORKS, KHATHA NO.801/718/1.
7. SRI. S.N. VENKATESH, S/O S. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, PROVISION STORES, KHATHA NO.8/8.
8. SRI. H. RAMESH, S/O LATE K.HARAKCHAND, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, CLOTH MERCHANT, KHATHA NO.188.
9. SRI. A.S. ASWATHANARAYANACHARI, S/O SHAMACHARI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, SRI RAJARAJESHWARI JEWELLERS, KHATHA NO.260/231.
10. SRI C.R. CHANDRARAJU, S/O C. RADHAKRISHNAIAH SETTY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, KHATHA NO. 367/300/444.
11. SMT. ANNAPOORNADEVI, W/O C.R. CHANDRARAJU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, KHATHA NO.409/368.
12. SRI.C.G. NANJUNDACHARI, S/O C.N. GANGADHARACHARI, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, ANAND JEWELLERS, KHATHA NO.410/369.
13. SRI. B. RAMESH, S/O LATE B.G. RATHNAIAH SETTY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, KIRAN FINANCE, KHATHA NO.784/1, 904/1.
PETITIONER NO.1 TO 13 ARE THE OWNERS AND ALL CARRYING ON THEIR RESPECTIVE BUSINESS AT THE ABOVE SAID PREMISES BEARING NUMBERS, GANGAMMA GUDI ROAD, (O.P.O. ROAD) CHIKKABALLAPUR – 562 101.
14. SRI. Y.L. VENKATACHALAPATHY SETTY, S/O Y. LAKSHMINARAYANA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, SHOBHA TEXTILES, KHATHA NO.581/527.
15. SRI. O.V.JAYACHANDRA, S/O O.V.S. VENKATARAMANA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, ANUPAMA STORES, KHATHA NO.546/353 16. D.S. NAGARAJ, S/O SRIRAMAIAH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, KHATA NO.32/32.
17. D.S NATRAJ, S/O LATE SRIRAMAIAH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, KHATA NO.197/182.
PETITIONER NO.14 TO 17 ARE THE OWNERS AND ALL CARRYING ON THEIR RESPECTIVE BUSINESS AT THE ABOVE AND PREMISES BEARING NUMBERS SIR M.V. ROAD (BAZAAR ROAD) CHIKKABALLAPUR – 562 101.
AND:
(BY SRI RAVI R.S., ADVOCATE) 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPUR, ... PETITIONERS CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT – 562 101.
2. CHIKKABALLAPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, CHIKKABALLAPURA, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT – 562 101. (REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER) 3. THE MEMBER SECRETARY, LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY, CHIKKABALLAPURA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,CHIKKABALLAPURA, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT – 562 101.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, CHIKKABALLAPURA, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT – 562 101.
...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ANANDISHWARA, HCGP FOR R1, R3 AND R4;
SRI. VIJAYAKRISHNA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2) *** THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO PROHIBIT THE RESPONDENTS FROM DEMOLISHING THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 13 BUILDINGS IN KHATHA NOS.262/2/232/2, 853/764, 855/766 + 855/3/766/3, 746/668, 264/4/246, 502/452, IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS 1 TO 5, AND THE TAX PAID RECEIPTS IN RESPECT OF KHATHA BEARING NOS. 801/718/1, 8/8, 188, 260/231, 367/300/444, 409/368, 410/369, 784/1, 704/1, IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS 6 TO 12, SITUATED AT GANGAMMANA GUDI ROAD [O.P.O. ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPUR] VIDE ANNEX-A1 TO A13, AND OF THE PETITIONERS 14 AND 16 THE KHATHA BEARING NO.581/527 AND 32/32 IN RESPECT OF PEITIONER NO.14 & 16 AND THE TAX PAID RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF PETITIONER NO.15 AND 17 KHATHA BEARING NO.536/353 AND 197/185, SITUATED AT SIR M.V.ROAD [BAZAAR ROAD] CHIKKABALLAPUR, VIDE ANNEX-B1 TO B4, PURSUANT TO NEW ITEMS APPEARED IN VIJAYA KARNATAKA DTD.1.3.2015 AND 2.3.2015 VIDE ANNEX-C1 TO C2 AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER In these writ petitions the petitioners are seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus against the respondents not to illegally demolish the construction put up on the properties described in the schedule situated at Gangammana Gudi Road, (OPO Road) and Sir M.V. Road (Bazar Road), Chikkaballapura Town, except following the due process of law.
2. The petitioners claim to be absolute owners of the properties, morefully described in the schedule to the writ petition. Some of them have produced title deeds and other relevant documents along with their writ petitions. According to them they have obtained permission and put up construction in the disputed properties and they are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same.
3. The petitioners alleged that without there being any acquisition proceedings and without due process of law, the respondents 2 to 5 have initiated steps to dispossess them and there is imminent threat of demolition of their properties for the purpose of widening of the road.
4. The learned counsel for petitioners contend that the petitioners have not encroached any portion of the road. It is submitted by them that the respondents have marked their buildings for the purpose of demolition without notice to them. This act of the respondents, the petitioners contend that, it is an open proclamation that they carryout the demolition work without following due process of law, which is in clear violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In turn, the petitioners alleged that if the demolition work is carried out and their shops are demolished, they would be deprived of their life and livelihood.
5. In response to the contentions raised by the learned counsel for petitioners, the learned counsel for respondents had submitted that the petitioners have encroached over the property of the State. Since the respondents want to widen the road, which is of heavy traffic, they proceed to demolish the illegal structure put up on the Government land. He further submits that they will take action only in accordance with law.
6. Heard the learned counsel for parties.
7. Upon hearing the learned counsel for parties, I find from the material on record that the petitioners claim to be the owners in actual possession and enjoyment of their respective lands. They proved their title to the said lands. At this stage, it is important to mention that the respondents want to widen the road in the interest of public. It cannot be forgotten that the right of the citizen would be affected by the acts of the respondents. None of the petitioners, who asserted as owner of the land, cannot be denied of an opportunity to put forth their case before the respondent authorities.
8. Regarding the alleged encroachment by the petitioners, they have to be given fair and reasonable opportunity to file their objections inclusive of necessary documents. In turn, the respondent authorities have to consider the same after affording personal hearing to them and pass necessary orders with regard to alleged encroachment by the petitioners.
9. In case the petitioners found to be the absolute owners of the property, their possession cannot be disturbed except by taking due process of law and acquiring the property in accordance with law and on paying compensation. If the petitioners are found to be the encroachers on the public property or road, then the respondents have to pass necessary orders in this regard demarking the actual extent of the encroached property. The petitioners shall be given 30 days time to evict the encroached portion. If they did not do so, the respondent authorities are at liberty to take action in accordance with law.
10. With the above observations and directions these writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VK