High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt.Zainab Bi W/O Sri Ibrahim … vs The Zilla Panchayat on 13 October, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt.Zainab Bi W/O Sri Ibrahim … vs The Zilla Panchayat on 13 October, 2009
Author: H N Das
INTHEPHGHCOURTOFKARNATAKAATBANGALQRES

DATED TI-IIS THE I3" DAY OE OCTOBER, 2:309' ;V---[: f  

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I-LN.I'NAGP.}§1OIr{AN:'DZXS:'-I.,,.A 

WRIT PETITION No. B13525/2609'(LB-RESIRTT 

BETWEEN:
Srnt. ZAINAB B1 V

W/O. TBRAI-IIM KHATIB

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS V I A  A
R/P BHADRAPUR (l>IOUSE~'IV"G;76) " 
PALA POST, MUNDQ()D TQ.,g  'A 
U.K DIST. =   ~ ~ I   PETITIONER

(By Sri. I{_ALEEMULL-AH .SB.ARIE'E§ ADV.)

.I.$,¥.>T_..Q  . I  " 
1.  ZILLAPANCHAYAT
IITTARA KANNg_3ID,A DIST.
- I "KAR."'$/AR
»  ~ REB, BY.ITS._CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

2.  THE TA:L.UT< PANCHAYAT
'--~MUNDGC)D

UTTARA KANNADA DIST
MUNDGOD

L' V»   B..Y ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER

P,__,.._/'3
Q»,



3. THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT
KODAE1 VILLAGE
MUNDGOD TQ.,

U.K DIST.
REP. BY ITS ADHYAKSHAI

SECRETARY.  RE'S4PONDENT'S<__  ' -  

(RI TO 3 SD.)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS PILED.'UNVDER'ARVTIcIi2ES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION. j4OP-..AINDIA"' WITH A
PRAYER TO QUASH THE"'IMPU--G1\€.ED "ORDER OE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT AT ANNEX-J DT. t5;5:20_o9 "As, _IIi..LEGAL AND

ONE WITHOUT JURISDICTION BYf..ISSUIE$3G A WRIT OE
CERTIORARI AND-ET’c. ” ‘ ‘

THIS COMING ON EOR
PRELIMINARY HExXR}NG.._B ._GROLfPVV_THIS DAY, THE COURT
PASSED TEE F’O;|;.rLOV’é!4IN(3′;’«…_

Petitioner A the .I–reSi’deIit of Bhadrapur viilage of Mudgod

Vitaiuk,”i–rIC’U’ttara”I*}s§annETiéi2’diSirict. The third respondent by collecting

oe,pOS;i.tVOf,::RS0.500!¢i_ifrom the petitioner as per Annexure B gave

water’-…cOnRectioi1Ai0 to her house On 03.02.2004. Thereafter the

“”Z-:i.”V’A”.__oetitiOnerz the benefit Of essentiai suppiy Of water till the

disconnection came to be made on 05.05.2009 as per

‘Annexure J. The reaSOning given by third respondent in Annexure .1

WWW

.iiy’V§;Rsr14o1io2oo9

that there is increase in population of the village and thereforefimater

supply to the petitioner’s house is disconnected, is unreasionabl’eV:’a.ndi–, _

unacceptable. If there is shortage of watermin the_v’i’iia~§,}ew»th’eVn the

same is to be regulated but the third respondent.jcarinot.di’scor§:nect::;_t

the water supply totally to the house«-of the’petitioners”Fii1’th.eVr shed

impugned order passed by the third respc.nde.nt as per Annevztiure J is
without notice to the petitione.ri7an_d’–_as %.such”‘«th’eA:s’ame is opposed to

the principles of natural justice’; — if V

2. For the reas’o’;;f..s;. stated aboire, ‘the_Vfol.ic–witng;

I. 00 Writ petivtionis .hei=ehyl.allowed.
II, , The i.rVnpusgned’-order at Annexure I dated 05.05.2009
passed hy’the–«third respondent is hereby quashed.
A :11. .0 v.f[11e:”third respondent is at liberty to pass appropriate
1 accordance with law after providing an

.~ opportunity to the petitioner.

sa/-=
gripes