IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.51699 OF 2013 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri S.S.Lokesha S/o late Subbe Gowda, Aged about 53 years, R/at Diddahalli, Chunchanakatte Hobli, K.R.Nagar Taluk, Mysore District – 571617. …Petitioner (By Sri R.S.Ravi, Advocate) AND:
1. The Tahsildar, K.R.Nagar Taluk, K.R.Nagar, Mysore District – 571 617.
2. Assistant Executive Engieneer, Cauvery Niravari Nigama Niyamitha, No.2, Harangi Right Canal Sub-Division, Hosur, K.R.Nagar Taluk, Mysore District – 571 617. … Respondents (By Smt. Niloufer Akbar, AGA for R1, Sri K.S.Bheemaiah, Advocate for R2 ) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the notice dated 08.03.2013, issued by the R2, vide Annexure-B; quash the notice dated 01.04.2013, passed by the R2, vide Annexure-C and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This writ petition is directed against the notices dated 08.03.2013 and 01.04.2013 at Annexures-B and C respectively.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner of the land measuring 1 acre 33 guntas in Sy.No.85/2A. The petitioner has put up a residential house and cattle shed in the aforesaid land. He has also obtained licence for running Flour Mill in the said Sy.No. during the year 1984 to an extent of 1 gunta. On 08.03.2013, the second respondent issued a notice to the petitioner stating that he has encroached the land of the Government Nala in Sy.No.85/2A and called upon the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment immediately on receipt of the said notice. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner has filed this writ petition.
3. Pursuant to the notices issued by this Hon’ble Court, statement of objections are filed and Para 6 reads as under:
“6. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has issued the notice to remove the encroachment land as the land is acquired for the benefit of former and encroachment does causes the obstruction to easy flow of water in the canal. The respondent No.1 on the basis of the request made b the respondent No.2 and also request by the general public has taken action to evict the encroachment of land which was clearly marked in the sketch prepared by the surveyor. It is also submitted that the petitioner has himself removed the encroachment the Government land where he has constructed the flour mill on 20.11.2013. In this regard mahazar was also drawn and a report was also published in local news paper.”
4. Sri R.S.Ravi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though Annexure-B is termed as notice, it is a final order, there is direction to remove the encroachment immediately. The impugned orders Annexures B and C are passed without giving any notice contrary to the provisions of law.
5. Per contra, Smt.Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate, on the basis of the statement of objections, submitted that pursuant to that notice petitioner has removed the encroachment of Government Nala.
6. In view of the statement made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE rv/gjm