Disposed

Sri. Gurunath Vadde v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Sept 2024WP/26892/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL concerning the construction of a pacha tar road in Bidar District, the Court held that road formation cannot be directly ordered via public interest litigation. It directed State authorities to consider a pending representation regarding the road within six months.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to respondents to consider the representation dated 24.04.2023 regarding road construction expeditiously, not later than six months.

Sri. Gurunath Vadde Vs the State of Karnataka — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:40234-DB WP No. 26892 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶6

WRIT PETITION No. 26892 OF 2023 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. GURUNATH VADDE, S/O VAJINATH VADDE, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, SOCIAL WORKER, R./O JANASEVA ASHRAMA, BHAVANI BIJALAGAON-585443. KAMALANAGAR TALUK, BIDAR DISTRICT, MOBILE No.9901687999 AADHAAR No.665933222123, PAN No.AERPV9730M EMAIL. gurunathvadde@ gamil.com

¶9

Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

(BY SRI J. R. MOHAN, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ, M.S.BUILDINGS, DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:40234-DB WP No. 26892 of 2023

¶16

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & STATISTICS, M.S.BUILDINGS, DR.B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶17

THE SECRETARY, KALYANA KARNATAKA REGION DEVELOPMENT BOARD, ”ABHIVRUDHI BHAVAN”, OPP: IVAN-E-SHAHI GUEST HOUSE, KALABURGI-585102.

¶18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BIDAR DISTRICT, NANDI COLONY, BIDAR-585401.

¶19

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYATH, FORT ROAD, BIDAR-585401

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1,R2 & R4)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSTRUCT A PAKKA TAR ROAD BETWEEN SRI SOMESHWARA TEMPLE SITUATED AT KAKANALA, AND SRI CHAKRAKOTI BAYAWWA MATHA OF LAKHANGAON BOTH THE PLACES COME UNDER BHALKI TALUK OF BIDAR DISTRICT, BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24/04/2023 MADE BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:40234-DB WP No. 26892 of 2023

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. ARAVIND)

¶28

The public interest petitioner has brought this petition in the style as public interest litigation. The prayer in the petition is to direct the respondents to construct Pakka Tar road between Sri Someshwara Temple situated at Kakanala and Sri. Chakrakoti Bayawwa Matha of Lakhangaon, Bhalki Taluk, Bidar District.

¶29

The petitioner is pleaded to be social worker carrying on various social welfare activities. As stated in the petition, the districts of Bidar, Gulbarga, Raichur, Koppal, Yadgir and Bellary are part of Kalyana Karnataka Region. The region has not seen much development as compared to the other districts.

¶30

It is stated that Sri Someshwara Temple situated at Kakanala and Sri. Chakrakoti Bayawwa Matha of Lakhangaon are within the Bhalki Taluka. Both the places has renowned history and place of tourism. The thousands of devotees from different States would visit the temple and Matha. Due to the bad condition of the road, the devotees are facing inconvenience and hardship. The

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:40234-DB WP No. 26892 of 2023

¶32

numerous representations made to the competent authorities to form the motorable road have not resulted in any responsive action It is further stated that the representations of the petitioner are not considered.

¶33

Learned advocate for the petitioner Sri J.R. Mohan submits that the respondent-State authorities be directed to form motorable road.

¶34

Learned Additional Government Advocate Ms. Niloufer Akbar appearing on behalf of the State, on service of advance notice, assists the Court. She submits that the representation will be considered. However, strongly oppose the maintainability of writ petition.

¶35

Considered the submissions of learned advocates for the parties.

¶36

The prayer in the petition is to issue directions to form road between two places stated hereinabove. The users of the road are entitle to motorable road. The motorable road is to be provided by the State and its authorities. The formation of road cannot be considered and brought under the public interest litigation. The

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:40234-DB WP No. 26892 of 2023

¶38

said aspect remains in the domain of the State. It is to be reminded that providing basic amenities like road is the duty of the State.

¶39

This Court is constrained to place on record that once the representation is made to the authorities, it is their duty to consider and respond to the representations. The non-consideration of the representation dated 24.04.2023 is a concern to be noted by the Court. The State and its authorities cannot wait for a direction from the Court to answer the representation. The respondents are directed to consider the representation as expeditiously as possible not later than six months from the date of this order.

¶40

This Court has not expressed any opinion on merits.

¶41

Except to the observations hereinabove, the present petition is not entertained. Accordingly, disposed of.

¶42

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶43

Sd/(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶44

VBS/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Sri. Gurunath Vadde v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Gurunath Vadde 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 H L Laxmipathy Vs Dr Shalini Rajanesh

Mr M S Ramanujan Vs State of Karnataka

Smt B Sumithra Vs N Jayaram

Sri. Ravishankar S. Vs Smt. Arathi Venkatesh Sunadholi

G. K. Rathna Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S. Skanda Armo Ury Vs Sri. Dayananda. K. a.