Jeevappa Bheemappa Mallapura vs Chief Secretary Government Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5162 Kant

                           -1-



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                        PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

                           AND

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

     WRIT PETITION NO.68597 OF 2011 (GM-RES-PIL)
                        c/w
     WRIT PETITION NO.32870 OF 2002 (GM-RES-PIL)


In W.P.No.68597/2011:


BETWEEN:


1.     KUMARI RENUKA
       D/O KARIBASAPPA GUDDANNAVAR
       AGE: 22 YEARS,
       OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE.

2.     KUMARI GANGU
       AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT

       BOTH PETITIONERS No.1 & 2
       ARE R/O KODIHAL VILLAGE,
       TALUK: RANEBENNUR,
       DISTRICT: HAVERI.              ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI AMRUTHESH N P, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT, REVENUE
       VIDHANA SOUDHA,
       AMBEDHKAR VEEDHI,
       BENGALURU - 560 001.
                          -2-



2.   THE PRESIDENT OF THE COMMITTEE
     CONSTITUTED BY GOVERNMENT
     OF KARNATAKA FOR REHABILITATION
     OF VILLAGE NALUVAGILU,
     SRI K.B.KOLIVAD,
     MINISTER OF MINOR IRRIGATION,
     VIDHANA SOUDHA,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

3.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
     HAVERI, DISTRICT: HAVERI.

4.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
     ZILLA PANCHAYATH,
     HAVERI, DISTRICT: HAVERI.

5.   THE DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER,
     HAVERI, DISTRICT: HAVERI.

6.   ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
     HAVERI SUB-DIVISION,
     HAVERI.

7.   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
     ZILLA PANCHYATH ENGINEERING
     DIVISION, HAVERI.

8.   ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
     ZILLA PANCHYATH ENGINEERING
     SUB -DIVISION, RANEBENNUR,
     HAVERI : DISTRICT.

9.   ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER,
     HARIHAR POLY FIBERS,
     KUMAR PATNAM, HARIHARA
     TALUK : RANEBENNUR,
     DISTRICT : HAVERI.                ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI DHYAN CHINNAPPA, Addl.AG A/W
 SRI H.R.SHOWRI, AGA FOR
 R1, R2, R3, R5 & R6;
 SRI PRAMOD N KATHAVI, SR.COUNSEL
 FOR SMT.ANKITHA G SHELKE, ADVOCATE
 FOR R9)

     THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF
                             -3-



MANDAMUS AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 8 DIRECTING
THEM TO IMPLEMENT THE SCHEME OF REHABILITATION OF
VILLAGERS OF NLAUVAGILU VILLAGE TO SY.NO.11 TO 23 OF
KODIHAL VILLAGE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANNEXURE-A IN ITS
ENTIRETY; (B) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS AGAINST
RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 8 DIRECTING THEM TO WITHDRAW THE
ENTIRE ALLOTMENTS OF THE PLOTS MADE IRREGULARY
INDEROGATION ANNEXURE-A, ETC.

In W.P.No.32870/2002:
BETWEEN:

1.   JEEVAPPA BHEEMAPPA MALLAPURA
     S/O LATE BHEEMAPPA MALLAPURA
     AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

2.   G K LALITHA
     D/O K I GUDDANAVARU
     AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS.

3.   G K ROOPA
     D/O K I GUDDANAVARU
     AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.

4.   G K DEEPA
     D/O K I GUDDANAVARU
     AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS.

5.   G K LAKSHMI
     D/O K I GUDDANAVARU
     AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS.

6.   SMT.V G SAVITHRAMMA
     D/O K I GUDDANAVARU
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

7.   RUDRACHARI MANACHARI KAMMAR
     S/O MANACHARI
     AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

8.   MUDEYAPPA BHEEMAPPA MALLAPURA
     S/O LATE BHEEMAPPA MALLAPUR
     AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

9.   SIDDHYAPPA R KARUR
     S/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
     AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.
                          -4-




10.   HANUMANTHAPPA HANUMAPPA ADAPPANAVAR
      S/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.

11.   HANUMANTHAPPA RAMAPPA KARUR
      S/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

12.   LAKSHMANAPPA RAMAPPA KARUR
      S/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

13.   SOMASHEKAR RAMAPPA KARUR
      S/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.

14.   NAGAMMA CHANABASAPPA GUTHALA
      W/O CHANNABASAPPA GUTHALA
      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

15.   SHANTHAMMA RAMAPPA KARUR
      W/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.

16.   THRIKURPPA RAMAPPA KARUR
      S/O LATE RAMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

17.   NAGARAJA LINGAPPA HITTALAMANI
      S/O LATE NINGAPPA SANAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

18.   PARMESHWARAPPA RAMAPPA KARUR
      S/O LATE RAMAAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

19.   HONNAATHAMMA SIDDAPPA SANGANAVAR
      S/O SIDDAPPA SANGANAVAR
      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

20.   AVALAPPA SIDDAPPA SANGANAVAR
      S/O SIDDAPPA SANGANAVAR
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

21.   SHEKAPPA SIDDAPPA SANGANAVAR
      S/O SIDDAPPA SANGANAVAR
      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
                              -5-




22.   SHANTHAMMA DURGAPPA CHITTANAHALLI
      W/O DURGAPPA CHITTANAHALLI
      AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.

23.   BASAVARAJU HANUMANTHAPPA MAHADEVAPPA SRIGERI,
      S/O HANUMANTHAPPA MAHADEVAPPA SRIGERI, AGED
      ABOUT 40 YEARS.

24.   SHAMBULINGAPPA MURAGAPPA CHANNAGOUDAR
      S/O MURAGAPPA CHANNAGOUDAR
      AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

25.   NEELAPPA
      S/O HIRUVA BEGAR
      AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

26.   CHANDAKKA MALAPPA HOLAKAR
      W/O VIRUPAKSHA HITTALAMANI
      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

27.   CHANDESHAPPA HITTALAMANI
      S/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA HITTALAMANI
      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

28.   MAHESHAPPA KANAKAPPA KARUR
      S/O KANAKAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.


29.   SOMARAJ KENCHANAPPA HITTALAMANI
      S/O KENCHANAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

30.   SHEKARAPPA RAMAPPA DODDAGOUDAR
      S/O RAMAPPA DODDAGOUDAR
      AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

31.   THIRUKAPPA HANUMANTHAPPA KARUR
      S/O HANUMANTHAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

32.   HANUMANTHAPPA BHEEMAPPA KARUR
      S/O LATE BHEEMAPPA KARUR
      AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.
                             -6-




33.    JAKKANACHARI MANAPPA
       S/O MANAPPAPA
       AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

       PETITIONERS No.1 to 33
       ARE RESIDENTS OF HEAD POST,
       NELAVAGILU, NELAVAILU TALUK,
       R.N.R. DISTRICT, HAVERI.        ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI AMRUTHESH N P, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     CHIEF SECRETARY,
       GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       BENGALURU

2.     THE PRESIDENT OF THE
       COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED
       BY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
       FOR REHABILITATION OF VILLAGE
       NALAVAGALA VILLAGE
       SRI K B KOLIVAD
       MINISTER FOR MINOR IRRIGATION
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       BENGALURU - 560 001.


3.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
       HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI.

4.     CHIEF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
       ZILLA PANCHAYATH
       HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI.

5.     DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER
       HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI.

6.     ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
       HAVERI SUB-DIVISION, HAVERI.

7.     EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
       ZILLA PANCHAYATH
       ENGINEERING DIVISION,
       HAVERI.
                               -7-




8.    ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
      ZILLA PANCHAYATH ENGINEERING
      SUB-DIVISION, RANEBENNUR,
      HAVERI DISTRICT.

9.    ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
      HARIHARA POLY FIBERS,
      KUMARA PATNAM, HARIHARA,
      DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.               ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI DHYAN CHINNAPPA, Addl.AG A/W
 SRI H R SHOWRI, AGA FOR R1 TO R6;
 SRI PRAMOD N KATHAVI, SR.COUNSEL
 FOR SMT.ANKITHA G SHELKE, ADVOCATE FOR R9;
 R7 & R8- served)


     THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDERT ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO MANDAMUS
AGAINST R2 TO 8 DIRECTING THEM TO IMPLEMENT THE
SCHEME OF REHABILITATION OF VILLAGERS OF NELAVAGILU
VILLAGE TO SY.NO.11 TO 23 OF KODIHAL VILLAGE, IN
ACCORDANCE     WITH  ANNEXURE-A     IN ITS  ENTIREITY;
MANDAMUS AGAINST R2 TO R8 DIRECTING THEM TO
WITHDRAW THE ENTIRE ALLOTMENTS OF THE PLOTS MADE
IRREGULARLY INDEROGATION TO ANNEXURE-A; DIRECTION
AGAINST R2 TO R8 UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, ETC.

     THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

Both these petitions are public interest litigations

(PIL) filed in relation to the subject villages, i.e., Nelavagilu

and Kodihal Villages.

2. The reliefs sought for in Writ Petition No.68597

of 2011 are as under:

a) Issue writ of mandamus against the respondents 2 to 8 directing them to implement the scheme of rehabilitation of villagers of Nlauvagilu village to sy.no.11 to 23 of Kodihal village, in accordance with Annexure-A in its entirety.

b) Issue writ of mandamus against respondents 2 to 8 directing them to withdraw the entire allotments of the plots made irregularly inderogation Annexure-A.

c) Issue any other writ/order/direction against respondents 2 to 8 under the circumstances of case as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the ends of justice.

3. The reliefs sought for in Writ Petition No.32870

of 2002 are as under:

a) Issue writ of mandamus against the respondents 2 to 8 directing them to implement the scheme of Rehabilitation of villagers of Nelavagilu village to Sy.No.11 to 23 of Kodihal village, in accordance with Annexure-A in its entirety.

b) Issue writ of mandamus against respondents 2 to 8 directing them to withdraw the entire allotments of the plots made irregularly inderogation to Annexure-A.

c) Issue any other writ/order/direction against respondents 2 to 8 under the circumstances of case as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the ends of justice.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

and the learned Additional Advocate General for the State

and the learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No.9-

M/s.Harihar Poly Fibres in both the petitions.

5. The material on record discloses that during the

pendency of the present petitions, several subsequent

events have transpired/ occurred in relation to the subject

matter of the petitions. The said subsequent events include

the order of this Court in Writ Petition No.109820 of 2016

(GM-RES) dated 15.03.2017 filed by Respondent No.9 -

M/s.Harihar Poly Fibers. In the said order, this Court had

issued the following directions:

1. The petitioner-industry has agreed to pay Rs.2.61 crore in the year 1993. The price index has escalated manifold based on the cost of living; and hence the amount agreed upon in the year 1993 may not serve the purpose at this point of time. Under the circumstance, instead of calculating logically, the petitioner is directed to pay Rs.10.0-0

- 10 -

crore, including the amount that has been deposited in the year 1993.

2. The respondent-Government, by making use of schemes that are available with it, is directed to put up 432 houses for the displaced villagers and hand it over to the villagers immediately after the completion.

3. After shifting the entire village, the present land is to be handed over to the petitioner for afforestation and the petitioner is directed to afforest the entire area within a period of five years thereafter. The said land shall not be used for any manufacturing activities of the petitioner-industry, but as a lung-space and to maintain ecological balance.

4. Further, if the said land is required by the petitioner, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make representation to the respondent, and it is for the respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders".

6. Subsequently, in appeals filed by the State as

well as Respondent No.9 in Writ Appeal No.100625 of 2017

(GM-RES) and connected Writ Appeal No.100256 of 2017

(GM-RES), the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as

under:

- 11 -

"25. In the result, the writ appeal filed by the writ petitioner is disposed off in the following terms:

(i) The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of rupees ten crores to the first respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment in any account of the State Government which would fetch the highest income tax deduction to the petitioner industry; or in the alternative, respondent No.1 to identify the head of account of a particular scheme in respect of which the payment could be made by the petitioner;

(ii) The payment of the said amount by the petitioner industry shall be construed as a final payment towards the rehabilitation scheme under the impugned government order and communications;

(iii) Other directions issued by the learned Single Judge are not interfered with;

(iv) Consequently, the writ appeal filed by the State Government stands disposed off".

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the

petitions, on instructions submits that the following persons

intend to submit a representation ventilating their

- 12 -

grievances to the Respondent/State, which is to be directed

to consider the same and pass appropriate orders/take

appropriate decision. In Writ Petition No.68597 of 2011,

Kumari Renuka and Kumari Gangu are the petitioners. So

also in Writ Petition No.32870 of 2002, Jeevappa

Bheemappa Mallapura and others are the petitioners.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions

submits that both the petitioners in W.P.Nos.68597-

98/2011 and petitioner Nos.1 to 4, 6, 8, 10 and 29 in

W.P.Nos.32870-902/2002 intend to submit representations

to the State Government ventilating their grievances. His

submission is placed on record.

9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances

and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

petitioners as well as in the light of the aforesaid directions

issued in W.P.No.109820/2016 dated 15.03.2017 as well as

the directions issued in W.A.No.100625/2017 c/w

W.A.No.100256/2017 dated 18.12.2018 as stated supra,

we deem it just and appropriate to dispose of both the

petitions reserving liberty in favour of the aforesaid ten

persons / petitioners to ventilate their grievances by

- 13 -

submitting fresh representations to the State Government.

Upon submission of the said representations, the State

Government shall take appropriate decision/pass

appropriate orders, in accordance with law within a period

of three months from the date of submission of the said

representations, bearing in mind the aforesaid orders

passed by this Court in W.P.No.109820/2016 dated

15.03.2017 and W.A.No.100625/2017 c/w

W.A.No.100256/2017 dated 18.12.2018 and by ensuring

that no prejudice, injury, loss or hardship would be caused

to the respondent No.9 - M/s.Harihar Polyfibres in this

regard.

Subject to the aforesaid directions and reserving

liberty in favour of the aforesaid persons / ten petitioners,

the petitions stand disposed of.

SD/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

SD/-

JUDGE

DH/SRL