High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Yajaman Gowdegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri Yajaman Gowdegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 July, 2009
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 313'? DAY OF JULY 2009

PRESENT

THE I-ION'BLE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN, CHIEF 

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE v.o. SABHFxI£T'1f.,  

WRIT PETITION NO. 2070/2009: (KI..R}REs}i5.1'L}- 4'   E  7

BETWEEN:

1. Sri. Yajaman Gowdegowda,
S /o. Kaladevegowda,
Aged about 50 years.

2. Sri. Rajegowda,
S/o. Vyramudigowda;  .  _  - 
Aged about 52 years'.g. Lba. '  : ~~*    so 

3. Sri. D.P. lbyevegoiirdgh,  3;' T
S/o. Putteg,oW-da,V ' .1" 
Aged about  'years..__ ' '

4. Sri. Ramesha, 
TS/o. De«xfiego'wda, ______ H
 Aged abo'uf:-.40 "years.
5. Sii.__Ra1§iesIfif}?; ~   
S/ o.~ Puttegowda,'  "

T   Aged about 4.0 "years.

  T. SuI'esE;a,

V' ' . 8,3,0; Late Thamrnegowda,

 ._Ag.e_d,ab"o_ut 45 years.

 



7. Sri. Swarny Gowda,
S/o. Devegowqda,
Aged about 55 years.

8. Sri. Jagadeesha,
S / 0. Vyramudigowda,
Aged about 30 years.

9. Sri. Shivaraja,
S/0. Madegowda,
Aged about 45 years,

All are residing at Dasanpura Viiiage, 
Hangodu I-Iobli,  

Hunsur Tq.,
Mysore District.

(By Sri. 13.s. Nagaraj -. Adv. for Petr.f3VAb.    ;

AND

1. The State of Karn;ata1{a,' ._
Represented byits SéjC_r_e_tary,_  .t
Dept. of Revenue,     
M.S. Building,    1, - V =
Dr. Arnbedkar Vei-idhi,'V1:'f   "

Banga1orev:--"E_o6O :00 *  .,   

2. The Deputy Cxomnzisstlonerg 
Mysore District, '' ._ " 
..--vMYS0T€-*1;  .
3.".-_'he Sub--1),iVis1ona}._Officer,
H'L1_nsg1r VS1;:'b:Diifisio{n,
I-Iunsur, V " ' "

  Mysore Districts'. 

-  ,'_I'E:.e Tahsiidair,

" V Hunssur T<:1'{,"

 ._Hu'nsur','}

__Mys0re 'District.

 

 *P§'1*i?r1o1§JERs



5. The Range Forest Officer,
Hunsur Taluk Forest Range,
Hunsur,

Mysore District.

6. Smt. Devamma,
W/o. Late Kempegowda,
Aged about 60 years,
R / at. Dasanpura Village,
Hangodu Hobli,

Hunsur Tq., Mysore Dist.    j ll

(BY Sri.Mahanthesh S. Hosmath -~» Adv. for  V; ~. ' _ .. 
Smt. Niloufar Akbar -~» Addl. Govt. Adv. for R31 to R5)  . A " 1'

This Writ Petition is filed sneer 226--._and".= 21271" 'er the 1

Constitution of India praying that this Court be pleased to issue a
writ in the nature of Mandamus directing. the" respondents 2 to 5 to
take necessary action against*r.e.isponde_nt. No.6 'Smt. Devamma and
prevent the encroachment of G.over'nment_ and recover the
cost of the trees, Whichis illegally 'cut-and 'removed by Respondent
No.6 by considering, the §;applicat~ion."_'«made to the Deputy
Commissioner, Assf.ista§r1t_, Commissioner," 'li'ai'isildar and Range
Forest Officer as "_?,8';~1'1,_.2003_,'=20_1"1.}2008, 20.11.2008 and
21.11.2008 respectively, producied it at A§,nneXures--'B' to 'E' and
further to direct .relS1pon'uients.,2'--«.to 5""o--vmeasure the Government
land bearing Sy._No;1.0_[2i5 rrie'asur_ir_ig 1-28 guntas, situated at
Dasanpura Village, l~ia.fr;godul"e.l__~iobli, Hunsur Tq., and fix the
boundaries in " the presenc_e"'« "of respondent No.2-Deputy
Commissioner, andetc., . ' " 

__ .'Fhis '\FJrAiti.Peti'ti.on coming up for Preliminary Hearing on this
day,' t_he_Co'o rtdeliverejgi the following:

JUDGMENT

” (delivered by PD. Dinakaran CJ.,)

‘*.iThel”petitioners who are residents of Dasanapura Village,

. ‘Fq_., Mysore District and who are espousing the cause of

4
the public, have filed this Public Interest Litigation, alleging that

the land bearing Sy.No. 10/25 measuring 1 acre and 28 guntas is a
tank bed land, situate at Dasanapura Village, Hangodujjlobli,

Hunsur Tq., and the Villagers are using this tank bed

cattle grazing and that the water in the said tank:–is

feeding the cattle. ._

2. According to the petitioners, there”–are several ‘valuia’ble’–..g

trees over the said land and the sarne””has been ‘protectedlllby the V

villagers of Dasanpura Village from’iiithei;past_ overilsevevral years;
that the sixth respondent Smt. lD.evamiin’a w:h’oi’_’iVsiiithe adjacent land

owner of the said_.,larid-,_ ocigcupiieicl thieii”_taVnkif’bed area and has

encroached into to ‘eittent’vofv acre and 28 guntas and
had cut standing on the said land; the
sixth respondentinfltience, colluded with the revenue
officials the inter_e_st of the villagers.

~ 3;» .ivs’«tl1e:i’c.ase of the petitioners that though they made

repreis’en*ta’tion’ i’respondents–2 to S in this regard to take

necessarif’ action’ ‘against the illegal encroachment of Government

sixth respondent; respondents~2 to 5 being the

statutory “authorities, did not initiate any action despite the

ieoniplaint made by the petitioners. Hence the petitioners have

6
katte land and not a complete Government land and that on

25.11.2008, the sixth respondent, who is an adjacent owner of the
land bearing Sy.No.20, made an application to the fourth

respondent~Tahsildar requesting him to survey her

grant permission for cutting the trees. After survey, it_.vvas ;}e:+iea1;§ci.t’ ‘

that the trees which were cut down, happen._t_o fal’l.lin”t:1jo lhidiivaliu ll

land of the sixth respondent and the-. siiithiv responder1f”isr._,h%£-di

encroached only to an extent of 5″jgu.ntaslovf land;tillIti:._’is.Vifurther

stated that necessary action has bee_n°’in_itiated..by. issuing notice
against the sixth respondent land’ si;§;’th”1=;=;§;.1;io’ndent in turn gave
statement on 24.01.2009 and-lfv:a.ca–tedg 5 guntas of

encroached land in _mahaie’r””was also drawn on

24.01.2009 to th_atiAeffeCti1_ I

5. Heard they_lllearnedflciozirisel for the petitioners, learned
counsel vapipearing fo’r’–v.the_vsixth respondent and the learned

Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 5 and

2 pg perused the records§

Learned Government Advocate while reiterating the

4’alaverinientgsllftnade by respondents 2 to 5 in the statement of

. iliobjectioiis, submits that the sixth respondent has already vacated

if

7
the said 5 guntas of encroached land in Sy.No.10/25 and a

mahazer was also drawn to that effect.

7. In that View of the matter, except to record V’

of the learned Government Advocate th»at.__6’h ihad ll

already vacated the alleged encroachezdé

Sy.No. 10 /25, no further orders are required in the
Writ Petition is disposed’

” :3 5.’Ch§é})J£{stice
…. ..

Ifi”‘dc_§é’

Index: Yes/»1\{o –. _ V

/.

fiosti    , 

l\/Isl<:V""?'c 3 --