IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR WRIT PETITION NOs.29667 – 29671/2017 & 30695 – 30708/2017 (LA – RES) Between:
1. Sri. Somashekar. N.S., S/o Sannanajegowda, Aged 58 years, 2. Nagaraju, S/o Nanjunde Gowda, Aged 46 years, 3. Smt. Jayalakshmamma, W/o Ramaswamy, Aged 60 years, 4. Smt. Lakshmi, W/o Pradeep. N.S., Aged 23 years, 5. Nanjegowda, S/o Nanje Gowda, Aged 70 years, 6. Smt. Puttagangamma, W/o Ganga Rudraiah, Aged 35 years, 7. Smt. Ajimabi, W/o Sabjan Sab, Aged 65 years, 8. Smt. Mumthaj, W/o Abdul Rauf, Aged 55 years, 9. Sri. Fayaz Pasha, S/o Karim Sab, Aged 60 years, 10. Sri. Ahmed Sab, S/o Karim Sab, Aged 70 years, 11. Sri. Nagaraj, S/o Yadiyurappa, Aged 45 years, 12. Sri. Venkatesh, S/o Sannaiahh, Aged 45 years, 13. Sri. Manjunath. N.R, S/o Late Range Gowda, Aged 34 years, 14. Smt. Vasantha, W/o Rangaiah, Aged 40 years, 15. Sri. Ramakrishne Gowda. P.J, S/o Javare Gowda, Aged 49 years, 16. Jyothi, W/o Ganga Rudraiah, Aged 35 years, 17. Sri. Iliyaz Ahmed, S/o Mohammed Peer, Aged 48 years, 18. Smt. Manjula, W/o Ramachandra, Aged 35 years, 19. Smt. Sufiya, W/o Seyed Nebi, Aged 70 years, All are R/at Noranakki Gate, Noranakki Village, N. Bindenahalli P.O, Dandiganahalli Hobli, Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan District-573 116.
(By Sri. Rajaram. S., Advocate) …Petitioners And:
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Hemavathi Irrigation Project-II, Office at Deputy Commissioner’s office building, Hassan-573 116.
2. Kaveri Neeravari Nigama, Anand Rao Circle, Bengaluru-560 001.
Reptd., by its Managing Director.
3. Regional Commissioner, High Power Committee, Hunsur Road, Mysuru-570 001. Reptd., by its President.
4. Deputy Commissioner Office at Deputy Commissioners Office building, Hassan-573 116.
…Respondents (By Sri. Bheemaiah, Advocate for R2;
Sri. Venkatesh Dodderi, AGA for R1, R3 and R4) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondents to dispose of the application filed by the petitioners dated 26.04.2017 vide Annexure-A and B and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law and etc., These Petitions coming on for Preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel appearing for parties.
Perused the records.
2. Petitioners are seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus to respondents to consider and dispose of their applications filed on 26.04.2017 (Annexures A and B) respectively. Petitioners are all agriculturists and are residents of Noranakki Village, Noranakki Gate. On account of non-consideration of their representations dated 26.04.2017 (Annexures A and B) they have approached this Court by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction.
3. A perusal of representations submitted by the petitioners would disclose that on account of construction of Hemavathi Reservoir Project (Left Bank canal) 25 cusecs of water when being released through said canal passes through Noranakki Village and as such entire village has been declared as “Sheetha Peeditha Villages” because of the seepage of water through canal to their buildings. It is also contended, on account of such seepage it has caused extensive damage to their houses and despite demand for payment of compensation, same has not been paid. It is also stated that adjacent villages like Bindenhalli, Nambihalli, Kallenahalli, Nandenahalli, K.Shingenhalli and Paduvanahalli which have also been declared as “Sheetha Peeditha Villages” compensation has already been paid. Hence, they have sought for payment of compensation for damage caused to their buildings on account of seepage of water through canal. Due to non- consideration of their representations they are seeking for writ of mandamus to the respondents to consider the same.
4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners has brought to the notice of this Court that under similar circumstances, this Court in WP Nos.29420- 29424 of 2017 disposed of on 03.10.2017 has directed for consideration of their representations by respondents No.1 and 3 therein and the directions so issued by this Court reads:
“6. Keeping in mind the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and the order passed by this Court in similar matters, including in W.P.Nos. 53115- 148/2016 disposed of on 18th October 2016, I am of the view that a direction has to be issued to the respondents to consider the applications/representations submitted by the petitioners herein addressed to respondent Nos.1 and 3 by carrying out necessary spot inspection in accordance with law. If it is found that the houses of the petitioners have been damaged due to seepage of water from the Canal, necessary action shall be taken for payment of compensation in accordance with law, to the petitioners. Six months’ time is granted for compliance of the order from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
5. Learned AGA as well as Sri. K.S. Beemaiah, does not dispute this fact. However, learned AGA would submit that they would not admit with regard to alleged damage said to have been caused to building of petitioners on the ground that it is a disputed question of fact. In the light of said contention raised, this Court is of considered view that it would suffice if a direction is issued to the respondents No.1 and 3 to consider the representations submitted by petitioners dated 26.04.2017 (Annexures A and B) by carrying out necessary spot inspection in accordance with law and in the event it is found that the house of the petitioners have been damaged due to seepage of water from the canal, further steps shall be taken to disburse compensation in the manner known to law in favour of petitioners. The entire exercise shall be carried out by respondents No.l and 3 expeditiously and with an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Court Order.
Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.
In view of disposal of main petition, I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration. Hence, it stands rejected.
SD/- JUDGE SV