Karnataka High Court
Gangahanumaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 February, 2023
Bench: Alok Aradhe, Vijaykumar A Patil
-1-
WA No.3002 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL
WRIT APPEAL NO.3002 OF 2018 (KVOA)
BETWEEN:
1. GANGAHANUMAIAH
S/O DODDA ARASAIAH
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.
Digitally 2. SRI. HANUMANTHA
signed by
RUPA V S/O LATE MUNIHANUAMAIAH
Location: High AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
Court of
Karnataka 3. SRI. ARASAPPA
S/O LATE MUNIHANUAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.
4. SRI. ANJANAPPA
S/O LATE MUNIHANUAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
5. SMT. GALIHANUMAKKA
W/O LATE GALIHANUMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS.
6. SRI. BASAVARAJU
S/O LATE GALIHANUMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/AT AVVERAHALLI VILLAGE
DASANAPURA HOBLI
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU-562162.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. SHYLAJA S.V. ADV., FOR
SMT. MANJULA D, ADV.,)
-2-
WA No.3002 of 2018
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR BEEDI
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE TAHSILDAR
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002.
3. A.N. RAMUMURTHY
S/O LATE PATEL NARASEGOWDA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
3(a) SMT. PREMA S
W/O LATE RAMAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS.
3(b). THEERTHA PRASANNA R
S/O LATE RAMAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
3(c). MADHANSUDHAN R
S/O LATE RAMAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.
3(d). NANDAKUMARI R
D/O LATE RAMAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
RESPONDENT 3(a) TO 3(d) ARE
R/AT NO.2966, 8TH CROSS, 10TH MAIN
RPS LAYOUT VIJAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 10.
4. NARASIMHA MURTHY
SINCE DED BY LRS.
4(a). SMT. SHANTHAMMA
W/O NARASIMHAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS.
-3-
WA No.3002 of 2018
4(b). SRI. BALAKRISHNA A.N.
S/O NARASIMHAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
4(c). SMT. REKHA RANI
D/O NARASIMHAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS NO.4(a), 4(b), 4(c)
ARE RESIDING AT NO.55, ITTAMADU
6TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, 5TH BLOCK
BSK 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU.
5. LAKSHMANA GOWDA
S/O LATE PATEL NARASEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 ARE
R/AT NO.2966, 8TH CROSS
14TH MAIN ROAD, RPC LAYOUT
VIJAYANAGARA, BANGALORE-560 010.
6. VEERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT RAVTHANAHALLI
DASANAPURA HOBLI
SHIVAPURAM POST
BENGALUR NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU-562162.
7. GANGAIAH
S/O LATE GANGABYRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
8. COWDAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
8(a) SHARADHA
D/O LATE CHOWDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
8(b). MANJULA
D/O LATE CHOWDAPPA
-4-
WA No.3002 of 2018
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS 8(a) & 8(b) ARE
R/AT RAVTHANAHALI VILLAGE
SHIVANAPURA POST, DASANAPURA HOBLI
BENGALURU - 562162.
9. RANGASWAMY
S/O LATE GANGABYRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
10. SIDDAIAH
S/O LATE RANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS NO.7, 9 TO 10 ARE
R/AT AVVERAHALLI, DASANAPURA HOBLI
SHIVANAPURA POST
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU - 562162.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G. AGA FOR R1 & R2
SRI. RUDRAPPA P, ADV., FOR R7, R8(b) & R9
SRI. GOVINDARAJU S.M. ADV., FOR
SRI. L.M. RAMAIAH GOWDA, ADV., FOR R3(a-d) R4(a-c) & R5
R6, R8(a) & R10 SERVED)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
24/9/2018 IN WP 46808-814/2015 AND WP 49805-810/2015
[KVOA] AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPELLANT AS PRAYED FOR BY
ALLOWING THIS WRIT APPEAL.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-5-
WA No.3002 of 2018
JUDGMENT
This intra Court appeal has been filed against
order dated 24.09.2018 passed by the learned Single
Judge by which the writ petitions preferred by the
appellants have been dismissed.
2. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the
State - respondents as well as the learned counsel for
the remaining respondents submit that the issue
involved in this appeal is squarely covered by a decision
of the Full Bench of this Court in SYED BHASHEER
AHAMED AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
AND OTHERS1.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants is not in a
position to dispute the aforesaid submission.
ILR 1994 KAR 159
WA No.3002 of 2018
4. In view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of
this Court, the learned Single Judge has rightly upheld
the orders dated 19.01.2005 and 28.07.2017 passed by
the original Authority as well as the Appellate Authority
under the provisions of the Karnataka Village Offices
Abolition Act, 1961.
Therefore, we do not find any ground to interfere
with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby
dismissed.
Consequently, the pending interlocutory
application, if any, is also dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
