IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION Nos. 29017 to 29021/2018 (LA-RES) BETWEEN:
1. Sri.Satyanarayana S/o Venkataswamy, Aged 39 years, Senior Citizenship benefit not claimed 2. Smt.Chenamma S/o Javare Gowda, Aged 64 years, Senior Citizenship benefit not claimed 3. Sri.S.T.Shivakumar S/o Thirumale Gowda, Aged 59 years, 4. Smt.Savithramma W/o Krishne Gowda, Aged 43 years, 5. Sri. Ere Gowda S/o Giddegowda, Aged 70 years All are residing at K.Shingenahalli Village, Dandiganahalli Hobli, Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan District-573201.
(By Sri Rajaram Sooryambail, Advocate) AND 1. State of Karnataka Represented by its Under Secretary, Revenue Department, M.S.Building, ... Petitioners Bangalore-560001.
2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Hemavathi Irrigation Project-II Office at Deputy Commissioner’s Office Building, Hassan, Hassan District-573116.
3. Kaveri Neeravari Nigama Anand Rao Circle, Bangalore-560001.
Represented by its Managing Director 4. Regional Commissioner, High Power Committee Hunsur Road, Mysore-570001. Represented by its President.
5. Deputy Commissioner, Office at Deputy Commissioner, Office Building, Hassan-573116. ... Respondents ( By Sri Dildar Shiralli, HCGP for R1, 2, 4 and 5; Sri. K.S.Bheemaiah, Advocate for R3) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 22.12.2017 and report dated 30.08.2017 by the respondents vide Annexures-A and B and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing in B Group this day, the court made the following:-
ORDER The petitioners apparently the poor villagers are assailing the Government order dated 22.12.2017 at Annexure-A whereby, the villages namely Nandanahalli and K.Shingenahalli of Chennarayanapatna Taluk of Hassan District are treated as the areas not catching the cold (²ÃvÀ¦ÃrvÀª®èÀzÀ) and therefore it is decided that there is no need to shift the villages to other places on the basis of the Report dated 30.08.2017 at Annexure-B made by the Chairman of the committee cum the Regional Commissioner, Mysore Division, Mysore; petitioners have also sought for quashing of the said Report.
2. After service of notice, the respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 have entered appearance through Sri Dildar Shiralli, learned High Court Government Pleader; the respondent No.3 has entered appearance through its Panel Counsel Sri K.S.Bheemaiah. Both the counsel oppose the writ petitions inter alia contending that the petitions involves disputed question of facts as to whether there was seepage of nala water from the Hemavathi Reservoir and consequently the residential Buildings of the petitioners have ceased to be habitual. They also contend that these are the matters within that lie the exclusive domain of the Executive.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the official respondents. I have also heard learned Panel Counsel for respondent No.3-Kaveri Neeravari Nigama. I have perused the Petition Papers which include a co-ordinate Bench judgment which ultimately resulted into a Division Bench judgment dated 01.04.2013 in W.A.Nos.1769 & 6521-6550/2012, in similar circumstances.
4. The contention of the petitioners is that there was in fact seepage of nala water more particularly during the rainy season and consequently, the mud houses of the petitioners have been gravely damaged, appears to be prima facie true. In fact, the reliance of the petitioners at internal page 24 to 27 in the report dated 30.08.2017 at Annexure-B lends credence to the said contention. The report itself states that the houses in K.Shingenahalli village are “²ÃvÀ¦Ãrv”. This aspect of the matter has not been duly adverted to by respondent No.1-Government in issuing the impugned order dated 22.12.2017 at Annexure-A. Therefore, the same ise liable to be a set at naught and the matter be considered afresh, keeping in view of the relevant facts and circumstances.
5. In the above circumstances, these Writ Petitions succeed in part; a Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned order dated 22.12.2017 at Annexure-A issued by respondent No.1; a Writ of Mandamus issues to respondent Nos.4 and 5 to conduct fresh inspection of the area concerned, having participation of the petitioners or their representative and submit the report to respondent No.1 who shall consider the same and make appropriate protective provision for the petitioners’ house properties within an outer limit of three months and Government within an outer limit of three months.
6. It is needless to mention that in conducting the said exercise, the respondent officials shall keep in mind the observations made by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 05.09.2011 and of the Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 01.04.2013 in the cases mentioned above.
Sd/- JUDGE DS/-