Disposed

Sri Neelappa O v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Aug 2021WP/6410/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition challenging the unauthorized erection of a Dr. B.R. Ambedkar statue on public land. The court accepted the respondent association's undertaking to remove the incomplete statue within four months and directed a compliance report by December 2021.

What did the court decide?

Undertaking to remove the statue within four months accepted; petition disposed of with direction to file compliance affidavit by 14th December 2021.

Sri Neelappa O Vs State of Karnataka — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S. SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO.6410/2020 (GM-RES-PIL)

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

1 . SRI NEELAPPA O S/O PAKKIRAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT CHIKKAMEGALAGERE VILLAGE PHOTALAKATTE HIREMEGALAGERE PANCHAYATH HARAPPANAHALLI DAVANAGERE - 583125

¶9

2 . SRI BASAVARAJAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS CHIKKAMEGALAGERE VILLAGE PHOTALAKATTE HIREMEGALAGERE PANCHAYATH HARAPPANAHALLI DAVANAGERE-583125

¶10

3 . H. THIRUKAPPA S/O KOTRAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS CHIKKAMEGALAGERE VILLAGE PHOTALAKATTE HIREMEGALAGERE PANCHAYATH HARAPPANAHALLI DAVANAGERE-583125

¶11

¶12

4 . SRI CHANNABASAPPA B S/O CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS CHIKKAMEGALAGERE VILLAGE PHOTALAKATTE HIREMEGALAGERE PANCHAYATH HARAPPANAHALLI DAVANAGERE-583125

¶13

5 . B KUMARA S/O JAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS CHIKKAMEGALAGERE VILLAGE PHOTALAKATTE HIREMEGALAGERE PANCHAYATH HARAPPANAHALLI DAVANAGERE-583125

¶14

...PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI RAJESH SHETTIGAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND

¶17

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001

¶18

2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577001

¶19

3 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELLARY DISTRICT BELLARY-583131

¶20

4 . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HARAPPANAHALLI SUB-DIVISION DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577001

¶21

¶22

5 . THE TAHSILDAR HARAPPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-583131

¶23

6 . EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH HARAPPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-583137

¶24

7 . THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577001

¶25

8 . THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ARASIKERE HOBLI HARAPPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-573112

¶26

9 . THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HIREMEGALAGERE GRAMA PANCHAYTH HARAPPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-583125

¶27

10 . DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR YOUTH ASSOCIATION CHIKKAMEGALAGERE VILLAGE HARAPPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-583125 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR A PATIL, AGA FOR R-1 TO 5, 7 & 8; R-6 & 9 ARE SERVED UNREPRESENTED; SRI SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-10)

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REMOVE THE UNAUTHORIZED

¶31

¶32

ERECTION OF DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR STATUE MADE BY RESPONDENT NO.10 IN FRONT OF BUS STAND SITUATED AT CHIKKAMEGALEGERE VILLAGE, HARAPPANAHALLI TALUK BY IMPLEMENTING THE ORDER DATED 29.02.2020 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.9 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CIRCULAR DATED 31.12.2019 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER THE DIRECTION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND ETC.

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties were heard on the earlier date (9^th August 2021). The issue involved in this petition is of erection of a statue on a public property without seeking the permission of the Authority in which the public property is vesting.

¶36

For the purpose of deciding the petition, a reference to few facts will be necessary. In November 2019, the tenth respondent which is a Youth Association formed in the name of Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar, erected a statue of Dr.Babasaheb

¶37

¶38

Ambedkar which is incomplete, on a Government land adjacent to a bus stand in the concerned village. Certain villagers raised an objection to the erection of the statue. A complaint was also made by some villagers. On the basis of the said complaint, a resolution was passed by the Grama Panchayath on 5^th March 2020. It was resolved that a proposal be sent through the ninth respondent for the relocation of the statue. The present petition is filed in which reliance is placed on the order dated 29^th February 2020 which is at Annexure-A. The said order has been issued by the Panchayath Development Officer calling upon the villagers to remove the said statue.

¶39

An affidavit has been filed by Sri S.S.Nakul, the Deputy Commissioner of Bellary District based on the order dated 10^th August 2020 of this Court. By the said order, this Court directed the Deputy Commissioner to appoint any officer not below the rank of the Assistant Commissioner to look into the legality and validity of the act of erecting the statue. The said officer was directed to issue notice to all concerned and to submit a report. Accordingly, a report was submitted on 9^th October 2020 by the Assistant Commissioner nominated by the Deputy Commissioner. It is recorded in the said report that the office

¶40

¶41

bearers of the tenth respondent agreed that if any land owner comes forward to donate his land for installing the said statue, they may be permitted to install the same in the said land. The report records that the statue has been illegally erected on a Government land without seeking the permission of the Government.

¶42

By the order dated 25^th November 2020, this Court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Bellary District to convene a meeting of all stakeholders including the tenth respondent with a view to ascertain whether a private land can be made available for relocation of the said statue. Accordingly, along with the memo of compliance dated 11^th January 2021, the proceedings of the meeting have been placed on record in which it is recorded that no one is willing to come forward for donating a land for the purpose of shifting the statue of Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar.

¶43

It is necessary to refer to the further orders passed by this Court. By an order dated 12^th January 2021, this Court recorded that the report of the Deputy Commissioner indicates that no one has come forward to donate any land. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the said order read thus:

¶44

¶45

"2. In view of this statement made in the memo, now, the burden is on the tenth respondent to take such steps as may be absolutely necessary to be taken to ensure that no disrespect is shown to the great human being who has given the Constitution to our nation.

¶46

3. The learned counsel appearing for the tenth respondent assures the Court that she will take instructions from the tenth respondent which is an Association formed in the name of Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar and find out a proper solution. The response of the tenth respondent shall be placed on record in the form of an affidavit.

¶47

In terms of the order dated 12^th January 2021, the

¶48

tenth respondent filed an affidavit on 9^th August 2021 which is affirmed by Sri Revansidappa S.B who is the Authorized Representative/the President of the tenth respondent in which he has tendered an apology for the illegal action on the part of the tenth respondent. It is pleaded that the State Government be kind enough to allot a land for installing the statue. When the State Government showed unwillingness to allot a land for shifting the statue, time was granted under the order dated 29^th July 2021 to the tenth respondent to state whether they are willing to give an undertaking to shift the statue. By the affidavit of 9^th August 2021, Sri Revansidappa S.B who is the Authorized Representative/the

¶49

¶50

President of the tenth respondent undertook to shift the statue to an alternate land within a period of four months from the date of the affidavit. Paragraph 4 of the affidavit reads thus:

¶51

"4. I state that pursuant to such directions from this Hon'ble Court, I hereby undertake to shift the Ambedkar Statue to an alternate land. However, to do so the Respondent No.10 Association would require a period of 4 months in order to identify the land and to do the needful."

¶52

(underline supplied)

¶53

In view of the undertaking given by the tenth respondent, it may not be necessary to issue a writ of mandamus. However, at this stage, we may make a reference to the order dated 18^th January 2013 passed by the Apex Court in a Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.8519/2006. Paragraph 4 of the said order reads thus:

¶54

"4. Until further orders, we direct that the status-quo, as obtaining today, shall be maintained in all respects by all concerned with regard to the Triangle Island where statue of late Shri N.Sundaran Nadar has been permitted to be sanctioned. We further direct that henceforth, State Government shall not grant any permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structure in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places. Obviously, this order shall not

¶55

¶56

apply to installation of high mast lights, street lights or construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll or for development and beautification of the streets, highways, roads etc. and relating to public utility and facilities."

¶57

(underline supplied)

¶58

Thereafter, several orders were passed in the said

¶59

petition by the Apex Court regarding removal of illegal religious structures on public properties. Ultimately, by an order dated 31^st January 2018, the Apex Court disposed of the said petition by directing that the implementation of the orders passed by the Apex Court shall be supervised by the concerned High Courts. It is to be noted here that this Court has already initiated a suo motu petition for monitoring the implementation of the orders of the Apex Court which is pending. One of the directions of the Apex Court to the State Governments was not to grant permission for installation of any statue in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places. In the present case, it is an admitted position that an incomplete statue has been erected on a Government land near a bus stop.

¶60

As observed earlier, in the light of the unconditional

¶61

undertaking given by the tenth respondent, at this stage, it is not

¶62

¶63

necessary to issue a writ of mandamus. However, we must make a note that an illegality is committed by the tenth respondent in the name of Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar who was not only the architect and author of the Constitution of India, but was one of the greatest human beings. He strongly believed in rule of law. As observed in one of the interim orders, the tenth respondent has shown disrespect to the great human being by committing an illegality in his name. Moreover, the tenth respondent has erected an incomplete statue of great human being on a public property. Before we close this petition by accepting the undertaking given by the tenth respondent, we cannot resist the temptation of quoting what Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar himself said in his historic speech delivered before the Constituent Assembly on 25^th November 1949 which is known as one of the best ever speeches in the world. It was his last speech before the Constituent Assembly before the draft of the Constitution was accepted and approved on 26^th November 1949. The relevant part of what Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar has said reads thus:

¶64

"For in India, Bhakti or what may be called the path of devotion or hero-worship, plays a part in its politics unequalled in magnitude by the part it plays in the politics of any other country in the world. Bhakti in religion may be

¶65

¶66

a road to the salvation of the soul. But in politics, Bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and to eventual dictatorship."

¶67

(underline supplied)

¶68

We may also record here something which is reflected from the affidavits and the documents filed on record. The officers of the State Government and the Peace Committee, with the active co-operation of the tenth respondent, ensured that peace is maintained in the village. At least to this extent, it can be said that the tenth respondent and all concerned respected the values cherished by Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar.

¶69

Hence, we pass the following order:

¶70

(i) The undertaking given in the affidavit of 9^th August 2021

¶71

by the tenth respondent through Sri Revansidappa S.B is accepted and is taken on record;

¶72

(ii) We direct the tenth respondent to file an affidavit on or before 14^th December 2021 reporting compliance with the said undertaking;

¶73

(iii) The petition is disposed of by taking the aforesaid undertaking on record;

¶74

¶75

(iv) Though the petition is disposed of on the above terms, the same shall be listed under the caption of "Orders" on 17^th December 2021 for considering the compliance affidavit filed by the tenth respondent;

¶76

(v) There will be no order as to costs.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/JUDGE

bkv

Sri Neelappa O v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Neelappa O v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Robo Silicon Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Kattanaika Vs the State of Karnataka

S K Rajashekar Vs State of Karnataka

M P Nrupatunga Vs the State of Karnataka