High Court Karnataka High Court

Navayuvaka Sangha (R) vs The Government Of Karnataka on 15 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Navayuvaka Sangha (R) vs The Government Of Karnataka on 15 April, 2009
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit
11-: THE HIGH comer 01-' xAmzA'rA;gA AT  Q 1'  2

DATE!) mm THE mm mm 9?    7

PRESE'fl'-'If. V _ 

T!-IE HGWBLE MR. 9.1).  
V    '  %  
zmn HOBPBLE n¢R,q1ja:j'I£:i:

WRIT PIsT1*r:s;§r}£*1vd;F_ 393%/2o§3"(eM§MMs+PiL)

BETWEEN:

1

NAVAYUvAK.A1fsANa3HA'(£2)'

REP 32 ITS pRE€~.:v1}Ez~;'1'»__ 'V .,

SR: M PAMPANA Gcsu1i;A_  

s/9 M BASA'-JANA Gama,

AGED ABOUT 39 j1;3:A1?,s'~~-"
R/Ai:'H:;1sA GEN_IKEHALU VILLAGE

 -  ¥3E.1}i;%I}§3g' TQ av, EJIST---3831 15

A R.'saMVAsi%z§:1§ARA scum

I *1-3/4:; Lxrfizé .1éA;%2w'.NA «scum

AGED A3oU;_'1'.i45 YEARS

G M"'NA"i'=AR}SJA

 "-SA/Q LATE G VEERABHADRAIAH
M331) ABOUT 35 YEARS

" T 'AR{:HAKA/ POOJARI OF SR:

--  SHANTHESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE

 "'11? YEREGOGDA
' S/O LATE VEERANAGGUDA

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

M VIRUPAKSHAPPA
S/O LATE MET} BASAMMA

 



AGED ABOUT 55$ YEARS
NO 2T0 5 ARE R/O GENIKEHALU VILLAGE
KGRUGODU HOBLI

BALLARY TQ 3:. 01315331 16  A' 

(By Sri N.Kubarappa for Sri S.S.Gutt.-31, Advacam.   ' 

1 THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNA_T'figKA 
BY ITS SECRETARY  "   
DEP'}'.(f)F COMMERCE as INDUSTRIES..{MiNEfi).,_ 
M s BUILDING BANGALQRE-$60001 V  " "

2 THE BIRECTOR 0? M1155-ES» 8§"GEQ'§,(§E3?¥  1 " 
NO 49 KHAN:¢A'g;iAv;;b; RAf;iE'«.CGURQE§f'ROAD

   "  
3 THE SENIOR "GEVQ,LoG:s~T~«(VM:N_Es
DEPT op MINES &a "{3EQLQGE?:

BELLARY --.§'38i3 10 1_

4 THE 33* _C:{)I§*§l1'«!,VIAS:'3}.v'«C)I~i.'lE4'.I§ 
 RESZENUE D1ViSi--{'_)I§_I %%%% 
'=B1V:L1,AR"s; 0'13? :35 BELLARY-533101

5 " ...S}§I. NAQ*U_E;:"e;'1:": _A'J~iMED
S./{}.M(3H.A»Mh21E:D VALIU LLA
AGED ABQUf£"45 YEARS
-- RABI HQU5sB NEAR VENKATESHWARA TEMPLE
 "-».H0SPi£T'3i'Q
" VVBELLARY DIS'I'--583201  RESPONDENTS

” (B y~_.Si& ‘D.1.’.N.RA<:z, FOR SR: PATEL D KAREGOWDA FOR R5,
' NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R-1 83 R-4, R-2 AND R-3 so)

, 3.

continue, the same would cause trouble to the public also
reduce the ground Water level, thereby the Grama Raneh§i_;:gt

resoived to stop the mining work.

2. {)3 the strength of the resolgfien p;1Ss’edi:”i3j?”‘G1’amgt “‘ 2

Panehayat, the petitioI:ers~v:il1agers have._mc;ve.(i1 the

petition seeking a writ of mandamus: or ‘cyther igpttge same _ V 1

natllre holding the 1eaee;*lteei1cef§ deed
No.DMC/QL/595/2003~04 Vtthrespehdent No.5 under
Notifieafion No.0: –144A¢MMN-2e0{}”_1V..de.teel_€)9;vi1;v2{¥t31 in respect of

the land bearzing s’s3é§:g;¢;;;a3§y tip” .¢’x’£em..for 4.22 cents of

Genikehalu Q3’ ‘ I ‘ Ia VV Htgv e’,= 8:. as iiiegai, arbitrary
and capxtieiofie éncit 110:’ ..t’ea§ondents I to 4 to cancel the

quarrying tease gfaflted. faivofiitof respondent No.5.

“=We’e’*1:«Via<}'e'A given ouifxmeexefigl eorlsieieration to the resolution

paseed évffaztehayat. The said resolution does not even

. "revfer to tee' suzvey number 110:' the Grama Panchayat in

_. lféfsoiutioti. observed that the saié poeja and festival is being

4'~-.eond:i_etee¥.4'in or around the impugned quarxy nor it is stated that

H zeeridng" referred to in the reselutien, is also lecateé in or

the imgugued quamy. That apart, the petifioners have not

I Z " A._ " é ' V ..'fV11z:i'.eeX:

furnished any materia} to the satisfaction of this (301111: either

supported by Muzrai Departmexzt or the Archeoiogical Depaigiment

to suiastantiate that theze exists a temple or deity or

which are found in the revenue or religious or othe;j’depeift:fi’eaia1 b

Iecerds which has got any religious

located either in or axmmd the impugned ‘l{:fa%$’.6d~ 35

respondent No.5 or is siiuated Within”fl:§eepm1i§.b–ited’Ar{i.stei:;ee”of the V

ilnpugned quarry.

4. Under such eficumistaneee; ulfiéhifiefixiq appreciate the

grievance of ieelief as prayed for. Wztit

petifion therefqxe with eqsts of Rs.5,000/ –.

Sd/- %
Chief Justice

Svd/S
Ie£d$

AA

‘ . . _ _ was’ fleet: Veg; 151:5′