Disposed

Shri Nagaraju.C v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Oct 2022WP/10316/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking removal of encroachment from a public road to access his private land. The Court directed responding authorities to consider the petitioner's representation within two months, keeping contentions open, and allowed the authorities to seek further documents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner represented grievances against non-consideration; authorities directed to consider in two months; contentions kept open.

Shri Nagaraju.C Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.10316 OF 2021 (KLR-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI.NAGARAJU.C, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, AADHAR NO.3140 2904 5712 S/O CHIKKARAMANAPPA, R/AT GORASAMAVU, POST-BOMMATHANAHALLI, PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT, POSTAL PIN CODE-561202.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.P.NARAYANAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU, POSTAL PIN CODE-560 001.

¶13

2 . THE THASILDHAR, PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-561202.

¶14

3 . SHRI.G.H.ANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, R/AT GORASAMAVU, POST-BOMMATHANAHALLI, PAVAGADA TALUK,

¶15

¶16

TUMKUR DISTRICT, POSTAL PIN CODE-561202.

¶17

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR. AMENDED V.C.O DATED 28.10.2022

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; SRI.FAYAZ SAB B G, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS MAKE FACILITATE TO THE PETITIONER TO MOVE FROM THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.102/4 IS SITUATED AT GUNDLAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK, TOWARDS THE LAND BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER LAND BEARING SY.NO.102/5 IS SITUATED AT GUNDLAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK AND ETC.

¶21

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court grieving against the non-consideration of his subject representation wherein he has sought for the removal of encroachment from the alleged public road which he seeks to tread on the said road leading to his private land.

¶24

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that

¶26

where the representation is given by the citizen, it is the bounden duty of the authorities to take a call thereon, this way or that way; the same having not been done, his client is justified in invoking the writ jurisdiction.

¶27

Learned AGA appearing for the official

¶28

respondents, opposes the petition contending that the grievance of the petitioner involves disputable facts and therefore, he has to approach the Civil Court for the redressal of his grievance. However, having so contended, now he fairly agrees to instruct his client to look into the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law and in a time bound way. This is really appreciable.

¶29

In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed off. Time for disposal of the subject representation is two months; all contentions are kept open.

¶30

It is open to the answering respondents to solicit from

¶31

the petitioner any documents or information as is required

¶32

¶33

for due consideration of subject representation. However, in that guise, delay shall not be brooked.

¶34

No costs.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

cbc

Shri Nagaraju.C v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Nagaraju.C v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Lalji Karsan Patel Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Kenchegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri N Gangaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Hebri Milk Producers Cooperative Vs State of Karnataka

Sri B S Srinivas Vs Assistant Commissioner

Poojappa Vs State of Karnataka