Karnataka High Court
Basappa Alias Chandrashekhar And Ors vs State Of Karnataka And Ors on 19 December, 2023
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9310
WP No. 203450 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 203450 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. BASAPPA ALIAS CHANDRASHEKHAR
S/O SANGAPPA GONAL,
AGE : 64 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURE,
R/o. TOWN AND TALUKA NIDAGUNDI,
DISTRICT VIJAYAPURA-586213.
2. ADIVEPPA ALIAS ASHOK
S/O SANGAPPA GONAL,
AGE : 55 YEARS, OCC : ENGINEER,
C/O. MADANSINGH,
F-153/A4, II FLOOR,
LADOSARAI,
Digitally signed NEAR HANUMAN MANDIR,
by SACHIN
Location: HIGH
NEW DELHI.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 3. RUDRAPPA S/O SANGAPPA GONAL,
AGE : 52 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURE,
R/o TOWN AND TALUKA NIDAGUNDI,
DISTRICT VIJAYAPURA-586213.
4. SHANKARAPPA
S/O SANGAPPA GONAL,
AGE : 49 YEARS, OCC : ENGINEER,
R/o NO.130, DRAKE ROAD,
SOMERSET, NJ 08873, USA
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9310
WP No. 203450 of 2023
5. MUTTAPPA S/O SANGAPPA GONAL,
AGE : 45 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURE,
R/o TOWN AND TALUKA NIDAGUNDI,
DISTRICT VIJAYAPURA.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAJA VENKATAPPA NAIK AND SRI S.V.DESHMUKH,
ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
AND EX-OFFICIO DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
VIJAYAPURA - 586 213.
2. THE GENERAL MANAGER (TRANSMISSION),
GADAG-NARENDRA TRANSMISSION LTD.,
CORPORATE OFFICE, RE NEW. HUB,
COMMERCIAL BLOCK-1, ZONE-6,
GOLF COURSE ROAD,
DLF CITY PHASE-V,
GURUGRAM-122009
3. THE GENERAL MANAGER (TRANSMISSION)
GADAG-NARENDRA TRANSMISSION LTD.,
REGISTERED OFFICE,
138, ANSAL CHAMBER-II,
BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE,
NEW DELHI.
4. PROJECT MANAGER,
GADAG-NARENDRA TRANSMISSION LTD.,
H.NO.38, RENUKADEVI NILAYA,
REVANASIDDESHWAR NAGAR,
GAJENDRAGADA, DISTRICT GADAG.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.B.YADAV, HCGP FOR R1)
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9310
WP No. 203450 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING that to
issue A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE
WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS,
THEREBY, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO FINALIZE
UPON THE OBJECTIONS AND PASS ORDER UPON THE SAME,
AS THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 EVEN DURING THE PENDENCY
OF OBJECTIONS OF THE PETITIONERS ARE PROGRESSING THE
WORK THEREBY LYING THE FOUNDATIONS UPON THE
NEIGHBORING LAND WHICH MAY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE
PETITIONERS AS THE SAME SHALL IMPACT ON THE
ORDERS/DIRECTIONS OF THE AUTHORITY ON THE
APPLICATION WITH PRAYER OF REROUTING THE LINE
THEREBY SHIFTING THE PROPOSED ELECTRIC TOWER FROM
POINT A TO C (HAND SKETCH OF LAYOUT OF LAND) OR
ELSEWHERE AND ETC,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioners is for the relief of
writ of mandamus and to quash the impugned order at
Annexure-P passed by the Trial Court dated 20.11.2023.
2. On perusal, Annexure-P is an order passed by
the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court at Basavana
Bagewadi in original suit i.e., O.S.No.201/2023 on an
application I.A.No.II filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9310
read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure which has
been rejected by the learned trial Judge.
3. The petitioners herein are the plaintiffs in the
said suit which is still pending adjudication. Petitioners
being aggrieved by the order of rejection of the application
filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil
Procedure have approached this Court whereas there is an
alternative and efficacious remedy available to the
petitioners to go before the appropriate forum by filing an
appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil
Procedure. However, learned counsel for petitioners has
approached this Court. He relies upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Godrej Sara Lee
Ltd., vs. Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing
Authority and others1 to entertain his petition under
Article 226 of Constitution of India.
4. It is a fundamental rule of law that when there
is an alternative and efficacious remedy available to the
2023 (2) KCCR SN 196 (SC)
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9310
petitioners, generally the writ Courts do not entertain the
petition as the petitioners will have to approach the
appropriate forum, unless petitioner makes out any
extraordinary case and exceptional case for interference
by this Court under writ jurisdiction which is a
discretionary remedy provided under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. I am afraid the judgment relied on
by the learned counsel for the petitioners would not help
them as the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the writ
jurisdiction could not be decided, unless petitioner makes
out an extraordinary and exceptional case for entertaining
the same and there being arbitrary exercise of powers for
interference by this Court despite alternative and
efficacious remedy being available. Therefore, I do not find
any reason to entertain this writ petition as the same is
not maintainable. Hence, I pass the following :
ORDER
Petition is dismissed.
(i) Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to
approach the appropriate forum by filing an
NC: 2023:KHC-K:9310
appeal within a period of two weeks from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
order.
(ii) Till then, status-quo shall be maintained by
the respondents, if any action is not
initiated as on today.
(iii) It shall be the discretion of the forum/Court
to deal with the matter in accordance with
law.
(iv) This Court has not expressed any opinion
on the merits of the matter.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
