MALAVIKA SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for respondents.

(2.) Though these two writ petitions are arising out of common impugned notice dated 29.05.2020 passed by respondent No.2 herein, however, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, these petitions are heard and disposed of by this common order.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners claim to be owners in possession of certain agricultural land and they are carrying out agricultural activities in the aforesaid land by renovating the existing building and have cattles. They have also constructed labour shed with minimum amenities in the said land. Petitioners are also having certain vacant land and as such, they have initiated constructions in the vacant land. The same was objected by the respondent authorities. Thereafter, respondent No.2 has issued notice dated 29.05.2020 directing the petitioners to remove unauthorised constructions in the respective land, as the construction made by the petitioners are in violation of the notification dated 04.10.2012 issued by Forest and Environment Department, Union of India. The petitioners states that, the said impugned notice dated 29.05.2020 is issued by the 2nd respondent, without affording opportunity to the petitioners as well as no enquiry was conducted by the respondent No.2 before issuing impugned show cause notice. Accordingly, the petitioners herein have challenged the impugned notice dated 29.05.2020 on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.