IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT APPEAL NOS. 2669-2672/2019 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN:
SRI S. RAMESH KUMAR S/O H SRINIVAS REDDY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT HALANAYAKANAHALLI CARLELRAM POST BENGALURU-560039 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI D.R. RAVI SHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ANUSHA NANDISH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. MANAGING DIRECTOR BESCOM, K.R. CIRCLE BENGALURU-560001 2. KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD PARISARA BHAVAN 1 TO 5 FLOORS, NO.49 CHURCH STREET BENGALURU-560001 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI GURURAJ JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THESE WRIT APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19/06/2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NOS.23084-23087/2019 [GM-KEB] AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEALS.
THESE WRIT APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. The matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the land in Survey No.72/1 was not the subject matter of the order dated 27th April 2018 passed by the second respondent in exercise of the powers under Section 33(A) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
3. Today, a memo is filed by the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent stating that the land in Survey No.72/1 and other four survey numbers were not incorporated in the order dated 27th April 2019 by oversight and therefore, the order dated 27th April 2019 has been corrected by incorporating the correct survey numbers including the land in Survey No.72/1.
4. The electricity supply to the building on the land in Survey No.72/1 was disconnected only on the basis of the order dated 27th April 2019. Now it is an accepted position that the order dated 27th April 2019 passed by the second respondent did not relate to the land in Survey No.72/1. Therefore, it follows that the electricity supply disconnected only on the basis of the order dated 27th April 2019 will have to be restored.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent states that the said respondent will take necessary action on the basis of the amended order in accordance with law after notice to the appellant.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant states that except for the aforesaid relief of restoration of electricity supply in respect of the building in Survey No.72/1, he is not pressing for any other relief in the appeals inasmuch as the remedy of the appellant is elsewhere.
7. Accordingly, we dispose of the appeals by passing the following order:
(i) The appropriate remedy of the appellant, as observed in the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, will remain open;
(ii) We direct the first respondent to forthwith restore the electricity supply to the appellant’s building in the land bearing Survey No.72/1 situated at Kasavanahalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District;
(iii) We make it clear that it will be open for the appellant to challenge the Corrigendum dated 12th July 2019 in accordance with law;
(iv) It will be also open for the first respondent to take action on the basis of the said Corrigendum in accordance with law;
(v) The appeals are disposed of on the above terms.
The pending interlocutory application does not survive and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE bkv