IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.47496/2016 (GM-FOR) BETWEEN U M ANAND S/O MANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT: 62 YEARS, R/OF: BANKAL VILLAGE AND POST, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT – 577132. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI RAVIKUMAR N R, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, BANGALORE - 560001 2. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, HEAD OF FOREST FORCE, ARANYA BHAVAN, 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560003 3. THE ASST. CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, MUDIGERE SUB DIVISION, MUDIGERE CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577132 4. THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER, MUDIGERE, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT – 577132. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIJAY KUMAR A.PATIL, AGA FOR R1 – R4.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY R-3 DATED 15.10.2013 AT ANNEX-J TO W.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri.Ravikumar.N.R., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks quashment of the Show Cause Notice dated 15.10.2013 issued by respondent No.3.
4. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response to the aforesaid Show Cause Notice, he has already filed a reply along with the documents.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that reply filed by the petitioner shall be considered and suitable order shall be passed under Section 64(A) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
6. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the reply filed by the petitioner and to conduct an enquiry as envisaged under Section 64(A) of the Act and decide the matter by a speaking order in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. Till the matter is concluded by respondent No.3, ad-interim order, if any, granted by the Bench of this Court shall continue. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VM CT:HR