Dismissed

Fayaz Khan S/O. Adam Khan v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Oct 2023WP/77266/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the manner of waste disposal by the Town Municipal Council alleging unscientific dumping. Lacking documentary evidence and facing a disputed factual question, the Court exercised powers under Article 226 and dismissed the writ petitions.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the writ petitions were dismissed for failure to prove allegations with documents.

Fayaz Khan S/O. Adam Khan Vs State of Karnataka — Environment and Pollution | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12513 WP No. 77266 & 77300-303 of 2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 77266 & 77300-303 OF 2013 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

FAYAZ KHAN S/O. ADAM KHAN, AGE: ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BANGLE BENA, BACHHAGAON VILLAGE, SIRSI-581402, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: KARWAR.

¶9

VENKATESH S/O. SUBRAMANI SIRSIKAR, AGE: ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NEHARU NAGAR, HANUMAGIRI, SIRSI-581402, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: KARWAR.

¶10

KISHOR S/O. HANUMANTH JOGALEKAR, AGE: ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ANGADI ROAD, NEHRU NAGAR, SIRSI-581402, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: KARWAR.

¶11

ROHAN HADIMANI T Digitally signed by ROHAN HADIMANI T

¶12

SHASHIKANT S/O. PANDU PATHANKAR , AGE: ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NEHRU ANGAR, HANUMA GIRI, SIRSI-581402, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: KARWAR.

¶13

RAMESH S/O. NAGU JOGALEKAR , AGE: ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ANDAGI ROAD, NEHRU NAGAR, SIRSI-581402, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: KARWAR.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI M.M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12513 WP No. 77266 & 77300-303 of 2013

¶19

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KARWAR DISTRICT, KARWAR-531 301.

¶20

THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, SIRSI DIVISION, SIRSI-581402.

¶21

KARNATAKA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, ”PARISAR BHAVANA”, NEAR HARI OM TRUST, HABBUVADA, KARWAR-531 301, BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICER.

¶22

THE CHIEF OFFICER, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SIRSI-581402.

¶23

GRAM PANCHAYAT DODDANALLI , REPRESENTED BY ITS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, DODDANALLI VILLAGE, SIRSI-581402.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SHRI PRASAD KINI, ADV. FOR R5;

¶26

SHRI G.I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADV. FOR R-4(VK NOT FILED); NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED)

¶27

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED:22/06/2011 PASSED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT IN NO. PURASABE-1/VIVA-229/09-10 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT THE 5^TH RESPONDENT NOT TO DUMP THE GARBAGE AND FILTH IN SY.NO.150A1 OF DODDANAHALLI VILLAGE SIRSI TALUKA DIST: KARWAR UNTIL DISPOSAL OF THE ABOVE PETITION.

¶28

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12513 WP No. 77266 & 77300-303 of 2013

¶30

ORDER

¶31

These writ petitions are filed challenging the manner in which the waste of Sirsi town is being disposed of by respondent No.5.

¶32

The case of the petitioners is that the garbage of Sirsi town is being disposed of in an unscientific manner near Doddanahalli Village causing inconvenience to the people residing near the village. However, no documents have been produced to establish the said fact. The said allegation is disputed by respondent No.5 as well as the learned AGA. Both submit that the garbage and waste of Sirsi town is being disposed of in a scientific manner in the manner known to law.

¶33

This Court while exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot go into the disputed question of facts. As the allegation of the petitioners is not supported by any documents, these writ petitions are hereby,

dismissed.

SD/JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42

Fayaz Khan S/O. Adam Khan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fayaz Khan S/O. Adam Khan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Merieux Nutrisciences Corporation Vs Verghese Chacko

Pradeepkumar M Vs Kavith

Sri. Nagaraju. M @ Nagaraja Vs Sri. Mahesha. D. a.

Nagappa Sannu Gond Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M/S Balaji Industries, Vs State of Karnataka

Sunish S/O Amarnath Metrani, Vs the State of Karnataka