Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 28248
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 20437 OF 2024 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. U JAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, W/O LOKAMURTY, R/AT 1370, DAVANAGERE ROAD, KEB CIRCLE, PUMP HOUSE, JAGALURU, DAVANAGERE-577528 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR P V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA by R DEEPA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, Location: HI GH VIKASA SOUDHA, COURT OF KARNATAKA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANAGERE -577501
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE SUB-DIVISION, DAVANAGERE -577501
4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, JAGALURU DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 528
5. THE TAHSILDAR JAGALURU TALUK, JAGALURU - 577501 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 528 6. THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL JAGALURU -577501 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 547528 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R1 TO R5;
SRI. MAHESH R. UPPIN, ADV. FOR R6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A DIRECTION RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENTS FROM INTERFERING WITH THE PETITIONER PEACEFUL POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES IN ANY MANNER INCLUDING THE DEMOLISHING OF THE STRUCTURE/ SHEDS STANDING IN THEREON OR UTILIZATION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES, OTHER THAN THROUGH DUE PROCESS OF LAW; DECLARE THAT, THE ACTION OF THE RESPONDENTS TO DEMOLISH / UTILIZATION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW IN ONE WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND ANY AUTHORITY OF LAW.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner filed this writ petition stating that the petitioner is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule property. The respondents under the guise of so called widening of the Road without following the due process of law and arbitrarily attempted to demolish the existing structures and tried to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the petition schedule property. The action of the respondents is in violation of the Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Hence, the petitioner aggrieved with the high handed and arbitrary action, filed this writ petition.
2. Heard Sri. Chandrashekar P.V., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.H.K.Kenchegowda, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Sri. Mahesh R Uppin, learned counsel for respondent No.6.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents without due process of law are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the property in question. Hence, he submits that respondents may be directed to evict the petitioner by due process of law i.e., initiating land acquisition proceedings. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition.
4. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the respondents will evict the petitioner by due process of law. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition.
5. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The petitioner is claiming to be the owner and in possession of the petition schedule property and the respondents without initiating any acquisition proceedings, are dispossessing the petitioner forcibly from the petition schedule property. The action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner forcibly is contrary to Article 300A of the Constitution of India. If at all the respondents intending to widen the road, the respondents have to dispossess the petitioner by due process of law i.e., initiate acquisition proceedings. Without due process of law, the respondents have no right to dispossess the petitioner from the petition schedule property.
7. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The writ petition is disposed of.
If the respondents intend to widen the road, liberty is reserved to the respondents to acquire the property of the petitioner.
Meanwhile, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the petition schedule property without due process of law.
