NAGESHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The 2nd respondent had issued an endorsement at Annexure-D, dated 5-10-2010 informing the petitioner that though he was granted contract for cultivation of fish in Muddana Gatta Kere as per the resolution dated 12-1-2010 passed by Kambadally Grama Panchayat, the Panchayat has decided not to collect any amount from the petitioner, in the meeting held on 17-9-2010. Hence, the lease amount for the year 2010-2011, which the petitioner has offered towards contract granted to him could not be accepted.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid endorsement by filing a writ petition in W.P. No. 39132 of 2010 before this Court. Though the notice was served in the said writ petition, respondents 2 and 3 have remained unrepresented. This Court has passed an order on 10-2-2011 quashing the endorsement and directing the panchayat to provide fair and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner before taking further action in the matter. In the course of the order, this Court has observed that the endorsement is unilateral in nature and it is opposed to the principles of natural justice.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of the order of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition, the 2nd respondent has to accept the tender amount for the year 2010-2011 and permit him to continue the fishing activities as per the order at Annexure-A.