IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR W.P.NO.41708/2017 & W.P.NOS.42117-42136/2017 (LA– RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SHIVE GOWDA S/O NANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
2. SMT. SUMITRA W/O KUMAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
3. SRI. BEERE GOWDA S/O CHANNE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.
4. SRI. AMANE GOWDA S/O LAKKE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.
5. SMT. KALAMMA W/O AMANE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
6. SRI. MANJUNATH S/O KALLE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.
7. SRI. MANJE GOWDA S/O PUTTE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
8. SRI. NANJUNDE GOWDA S/O SUBBE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
9. SRI. BEERE GOWDA S/O LAKKAMMA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
10. SRI. MANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
11. SRI. S.M. MANJUNATH S/O MANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
12. SMT. JAYALAXAMAMMA W/O JAYARAMU AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
13. SMT. RANGAMMA W/O KALLE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.
14. SRI. SUBBE GOWDA S/O NINGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
15. SRI. BASAVE GOWDA S/O KALE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
16. SRI. KALLE GOWDA S/O SIDDE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.
17. SMT. DYAVAMMA W/O NANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
18. SRI. RAMESH S/O BASAVE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.
19. SRI. JAGADISH S/O NINGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
20. SRI. NATESH S/O NINGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
21. S.N. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O NINGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT SASALUPURA VILALGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 118. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.RAJARAMA.S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HEMAVATHI IRRIGATION PROJECT-II, HASSAN, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 116.
2. THE PRESIDENT HIGH POWER COMMITTEE, HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT, HUNSUR ROAD, MYSORE – 572 103.
3. SECRETARY KAVERI NIRAVARI NIGAMA ANAND RAO CIRCLE, BANGALORE – 560 001.
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE AT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE BUILDING HASSAN – 573 116. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R-1, R-2 AND R-4;
SRI.K.S.BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 TO CONSIDER REPRESENTATIONS GIVEN BY PETITIONERS DATED 5.7.2017 AND 4.7.2017 VIDE ANNEXURES-A AND B IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though matter is listed for preliminary hearing, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. Petitioners are residing at Sasalupura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan District and they are seeking for a writ of mandamus being issued to respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representations submitted by them on 5.7.2017 and 4.7.2017 vide Annexures - A and B respectively and to pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law.
3. A perusal of the said representations would indicate that petitioners are agriculturists and have been cultivating in the properties owned by them which is situated in Sasalapura Village and on account of construction of Hemavathi Reservation Project, water released from dam passes through left bank canal through their village and due to the seepage of water through canal, entire village has been declared as “Sheetha Peeditha”. It is the grievance of the petitioners that on account of water seepage it has caused extensive damage to their building and the same has resulted in men and cattle suffering from various diseases and despite bringing these facts to the notice of the authorities Namely damage caused due to seepage of water, no steps have been taken to pay compensation to them. It is also contended that the adjacent villages i.e., Bindanahalli, Nambinahalli, Kallenahalli, Nadanahalli, K.Shingenahalli and Paduvanahalli have also been declared as “Sheetha Peeditha” and the villagers of said villages have already been paid compensation and rehabilitated. On these grounds, seeking relief petitioners have submitted representations vide Annexures-A and B to respondents 1 and 2 and on account of said representation having not been considered, petitioners have approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that under similar circumstances, this Court had issued direction to the respondent – authorities to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners and if after considering their representation and having found that the grievance is genuine and bonafide, compensation be paid to them as was done in respect of adjacent villages and hence he prays that similar direction being issued in these writ petitions also.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that grievance similar to the petitioners have been addressed by the respondents - authorities and the fact this Court had issued directions to respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representations also. Learned Additional Government Advocate does not admit about the actual extent of damage caused in respect of petitioners’ buildings due to seepage and submits that it is a matter for experts to decide.
6. Keeping in mind the rival contentions and also the order passed by this Court under similar circumstances in W.P.Nos.29420-424/2017 and W.P.Nos.29662-666/2017 on 3.10.2017, this Court is of the considered view that a direction if issued to respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representations/applications of the petitioners, taking into consideration that joint inspection has already been conducted as per Annexure - C and to pass appropriate orders determining the quantum of compensation including steps to be taken for their rehabilitation in accordance with law, it meet the ends of justice. Hence the following:
O R D E R This writ petition stands disposed of directing respondents 1 & 2 to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 5.7.2017 and 4.7.2017 vide Annexures-A and B expeditiously, at any rate within eight (8) months and actions should also be taken to cause payment of compensation in accordance with law, if it is found that buildings/houses of petitioners have been damaged due to seepage of water.
Ordered accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE RS/* CT:DN