IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.27395/2013 AND WRIT PETITION NOS. 30801-30807/2013 (GM-FOR) BETWEEN:
1. T.L. ANTHONI S/O.T. LONAPPAN AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
2. M.V. JOSEPH S/O. VARGHESE AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
3. SMT. ANNA KUTTI D/O. J.M.KUTTI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
4. A. M. SUBBARAYA S/O. MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.
5. A.G. SUBBARAYA S/O. GANAPATHY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
6. C.A. JOSE S/O.C.M. CHOWRADI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
7. BHUDHYAPPA GOWDA S/O. SOMAIAH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.
8. A.M. SUBBARAYA S/O. MAHABALAIAH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT HINDUVALLI VILLAGE ULAVI HOBLI, SORABA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 429. REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI JAGANNATHA BHAT S/O. SUBBARAYA BHAT AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT VONIKERI BANAVASI ROAD SIRISI UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT-581 401. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI S.G. MUNISWAMY GOWDA, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY FOR ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST M.S.BUILDING VIDHANA VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SAGAR DIVISION SAGAR SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 401.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA-577 201. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, A.G.A.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 26.9.12 VIDE ANNX-H PASSED BY R2.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri S.G. Muniswamy Gowda, learned counsel for petitioners. Smt. Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dated 26.09.2012 passed by the Deputy Conservator Forest, Sagar Division, Sagar, Shivamogga District, by which the petitioners have been asked to pay a sum of Rs.13,63,981/-.
3. From the perusal of the grounds made in the writ petitions, the principle ground of challenge by the petitioners is that the impugned order dated 26.09.2012 has been passed without disclosing any basis with regard to the market value of the properties in question.
4. When a query was put to learned Government Advocate as to how the respondents have arrived at the figure mentioned in the impugned order with regard to market value of the trees in question, the learned Government Advocate fairly submitted that the impugned order dated 26.09.2012 does not disclose any basis for quantification of the market value of the trees in question.
5. I have considered the submission made by the learned Government Advocate.
6. It is evident from the submission made by the learned Government Advocate that the impugned order does not indicate any basis for quantification of the market value of the trees in question. Therefore, the impugned order dated 26.09.2012 suffers bias and non application of mind and it is accordingly quashed and set aside. The matter is referred to the Deputy Conservator of Forest namely, respondent No.2 for determining the market value of the trees in question afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in accordance with law. The aforesaid exercise be carried out within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order passed today before the respondent No.2. Needless to state that it will be open for the respondent No.2 to deal with all the issues which may be raised before him.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST