Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU
SMT GURUSIDDAMMA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 9669/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON9BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.9669/2020 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. GURUSIDDAMMA
W/O LATE MALIGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
R/AT NO.235, 6TH CROSS
CHURCH ROAD
MULLUR VILLAGE AND POST
KOLLEGALLA TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT
PIN-571440.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR L, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
VIKAS SOUDHA
BANGALORE-560001
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
MALLURU GRAM PANCHAYATH
MALLURU-571442
KOLLEGALA TALUK
CHAMARAJ NAGAR DISTRICT.
2
3. ROBERT
S/O RAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT NO.234, 6TH CROSS
MULLUR VILLAGE AND POST
CHURCH ROAD
KOLLEGALA TALUK
CHAMARAJ NAGAR DISTRICT.
4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
D.C. OFFICE ROAD
BHAGIRATH NAGAR
CHAMARAJ NAGAR DISTRICT-571313.
5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX
CHAMARAJ NAGAR DISTRICT-571313.
&RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.NITHYANANDA K.R., HCGP FOR R1, R4 & R5
R2 & R3- SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
+++++
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 25.06.2020 PASSED BY THE R2 PANCHAYATH
DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER,
MALLURU
GRAM
PANCHAYATH,
KOLLEGAL TALUK, CHAMARAJ NAGAR DISTRICT PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 8B9 GROUP THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
3
O R D E R
Petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking for writ of certiorari to quash
the order dated 25.06.2020 vide Annexure-A issued by the
second
respondent
directing
the
petitioner
to
stop
construction of the building till further orders.
2.
Heard
the
learned
counsel
Sri.L.Chandrashekhar
through
video
conference
and
learned
High
Court
Government Pleader for respondents No.1, 4 and 5. There is
no representation for respondents No.2 and 3.
3.
The petitioner claims that her husband was allotted a
site bearing No.319 measuring East to West: 33 feet and
North to South: 66 feet as per Grant Certificate dated
01.05.1968. The property was subsequently renumbered and
e-katha in Form No.11(a) and Form No.9 was issued. The
property was renumbered as 118 and house list number was
issued by the Grama Panchayat as 235. After the death of
4
petitioner9s husband, katha was transferred in the name of
the petitioner. The petitioner was sanctioned with license for
construction as per Annexure-D. When the petitioner started
construction, respondent No.3 complained to the second
respondent.
The
second
respondent
conducted
spot
inspection.
Further,
as
per
the
order
of
Deputy
Commissioner, 5th respondent conducted a joint survey and
submitted his report wherein it was observed that there is no
encroachment towards 3rd respondent9s property. As the 3rd
respondent expressed that he is not satisfied with the survey
work, the Deputy Commissioner ordered for resurvey. In the
meanwhile, the third respondent requested the second
respondent to issue a direction to the petitioner to stop
construction. On his request, the second respondent issued
a direction as per Annexure-A dated 25.06.2020 to stop
construction till further orders. Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioner is before this Court.
5
4.
The petitioner and respondent No.3 are adjacent owners
of residential sites. The petitioner started construction on
obtaining
license
from
the
second
respondent-Grama
Panchayat. As per Annexure-D, license to construction was
renewed on 09.06.2020. On the complaint of the third
respondent, a joint survey was conducted by the 5th
respondent. The 5th respondent in his report which is placed
at Annexure-E observed that there is no encroachment
towards the property of the 3rd respondent. As the 3rd
respondent requested for
