Karnataka High Court
Sri. M.N. Ramachandra Rao vs State Of Karnataka on 17 January, 2023
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.54571 OF 2014(LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. M.N. RAMACHANDRA RAO
S/O NAGESH RAO M.G.,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-7,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
2. SRI.H.SHIVANANDAPPA
S/O NAGALINGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-2,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
3. SRI.GANAPATHISA
S/O RAJARAMSA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-3,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
4. SRI.HALASWAMY
S/O SHIVAMURTHY HIREMATH,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-4,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
2
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
5. P.S.MALATHESHA
S/O P.K.SHRINIVASA MURTHY,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-5,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
6. SMT.LEENA NAIDU
W/O RAVIKANTHA NAIDU,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
REPRESENTED BY HER
HUSBAND HAS GPA HOLDER
SRI.P.RAVIKANTHA NAIDU,
S/O PANDURANGA NAIDU,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-6,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
7. T.C.RAJASHEKHARA
S/O LATE CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
K.H.B. COLONY M.I.G.-8,
OPPOSITE M.K.LTD.,
J DIVISION, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE-577 602.
(PETITIONER NO.1,2,3 & 7 ARE NOT
CLAIM SENIOR CITIZENSHIP)
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K.R.LINGARAJA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-1.
3
2. THE CHEIF ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (C & B),
K.R. CIRCLE, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-01.
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
SHIMOGA CIRCLE, SHIMOGA-577 201
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
DAVANAGERE DIVISION,
DAVANAGER-577 601.
5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
HARIHARA DIVISION,
HARIHARA-577 601.
6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,
DAVANAGERE-577 601.
7. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
DAVANAGERE SUB-DIVISION,
DAVANAGERE-577 601.
8. THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
HARIHARA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
HARIHARA CITY-577 601.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1 TO R7;
SRI.B K MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R8)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DECLARE THAT THE ACTION OF THE RESPONDENTS TO
DEMOLISH THE PORTION OF THE BUILDINGS EXISTING ON
THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY TO THIS W.P. WITHOUT
4
FOLLOWING THE MANDATORY PROVISIONS CONTAINED
UNDER 'THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND
TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION
AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013' AND PAYMENT OF
COMPENSATION AS PROVIDED THEREIN AS ONE WITHOUT
JURISDICTION AND WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The subject matter of this Writ Petition is
substantially similar to the one in W.P.Nos. 52932-
52950/2014 (LA-RES), between SRI.RAVINDRANATH
H.S. & OTHERS vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS,
disposed off by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide
judgment dated 23.03.2016 wherein relief has been
granted to the litigants therein in terms of Paragraph
No.3 which reads as under:
"It is made clear that the respondents
shall take action only in accordance with law.
In that, they shall hold an appropriate inquiry
to determine that there is indeed
encroachment with reference to the title
deeds of the petitioners and actual
measurements of the property and it is only
after an appropriate order being passed, the
respondents shall take any further action in
respect of the alleged encroachment, for
otherwise, they shall not interfere with the
petitioners' property otherwise than under
due process of law.
With the above observation, the
petitions stand disposed of."
2. It has been consistently held by the Courts
that where relief has been granted to a litigant in a given
fact matrix, the same needs to be extended to other
similarly circumstanced litigant as well in the absence of
any repugnant factors. No such repugnant factors are
notified to the Court in this matter.
In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed
off granting the same relief to the Petitioners as has been
granted to the litigants in the cognate Writ Petitions,
mutantis mutandis.
Ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed
off.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Bsv
