Disposed

Sri K M Jagadeesh v. Kushalanagara Planning Authority

Karnataka HC12 Sept 2024WP/18340/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coffee planters challenged an inquiry report/minutes and a notice issued by local planning authorities in a writ petition. The court found an efficacious statutory revision remedy under Section 322 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, permitted withdrawal, and briefly restrained precipitating action.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal permitted with liberty to file revision under Section 322 KM Act within four weeks; respondent No.3 not to precipitate matter for one month.

Sri K M Jagadeesh Vs Kushalanagara Planning… — Municipal and Town Planning | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:37627 WP No. 18340 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 18340 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI. K.M. JAGADEESH, S/O MALLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER, RESIDENT OF SHIVAKRUPA, KUMBURU VILLAGE, SUNTIKOPPA HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)

¶7

Digitally signed by YAMUNA K L Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶8

SRI. A.M. VISHVANATH, S/O R.MUTHHANNA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER RESIDENT OF THAKERI VILLAGE, SOMWARPET HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶9

SRI. B.J. SHAMANTH, S/O B.A. JEEVIJAYA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER, RESIDENT OF JAYASHREE ESTAGE,

¶10

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:37627 WP No. 18340 of 2022

¶11

BELIGERE VILLAGE, SOMWARPET HOBLI AND TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶12

REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER RADHAKRISHNA, S/O T.RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT I BLOCK, BAICHANAHALL,I KUSHANALANAGAR-571234, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. NAVEEN G S., GUDIKOTE.S & BHARATH.K., ADVOCATES)

¶15

AND:

¶16

KUSHALANAGARA PLANNING AUTHORITY, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.5 BLOCK NO.1, CAUVERY LAYOUT, KUSHALNAGAR, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

¶17

MEMBER SECRETARY, KUSHALNAGARA PLANNING AUTHORITY, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.5 BLOCK NO.1, CAUVERY LAYOUT, KUSHALNAGAR.

¶18

KUSHALANAGARA TOWN PANCHAYATH, TOWN PANCHAYATH OFFICE, D.M. ROAD KUSHALNAGAR-571234

¶19

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:37627 WP No. 18340 of 2022

¶20

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER.

¶21

SRI. D.C. JAGADEESH, AGED MAJOR, S/O CHANDRASHEKAR, RESIDING AT D.M.ROAD, KUSHALNAGAR-571234, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶22

STATE OF KARNATAKA, URBAN DEVELOPMENT, BENGALURU - 560001.

¶23

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KODAGU DISTRICT, KODAGU - 571201

¶24

DEPUTY DIRECTOR, TOWN AND COUNTRY AUTHORITY, KODAGU DISTRICT, KODAGU 571201.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. UMESH P.B., FOR R1 & R2, VENKATESH.R. BHAGAT FOR R3, K.S.MALLIKARJUNAIAH FOR R4, SPOORTHI V HCGP FOR R5 TO R7, ADVOCATES)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE INQUIRY REPORT/MINUTES OF R1 TO R3, DATED 21.07.2022 BEARING NO.KUYOPRA/SAMITHI/01/2022-23, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-R AND ETC.,

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:37627 WP No. 18340 of 2022

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the inquiry report / minutes of respondent Nos.1 to 3, dated 21.07.2022 vide Annexure-R and also notice dated 26.07.2022 issued by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-S.

¶33

Learned counsel for the respondents submits

¶34

that the impugned order is revisable as per Section 322 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964.

¶35

Hence, the petitioner without exhausting the efficacious remedy filed this writ petition. Hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file a revision under Section 322 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act 1964.

¶37

Submission is placed on record.

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:37627 WP No. 18340 of 2022

¶39

¶40

The petitioners are permitted to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to challenge the impugned order and notice in the revision petition within the period of four weeks from today. Meanwhile, the respondent No.3 is directed not to precipitate the matter for a period of one

¶41

month.

¶42

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶43

SRK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Sri K M Jagadeesh v. Kushalanagara Planning Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri K M Jagadeesh v. Kushalanagara Planning Authority

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 a M Suresh Babu Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Seenappa Vs Venkataramappa @ Venakaravanappa

Shivamallegowda Vs Mahadevegowda

Revanasiddappa. B. G. Vs the State of Karnataka

The Federal Bank Limited Vs Matchmove India Private Limited

B Mallikarjuna Vs the State of Karnataka