C.I. ULLAGADDI AND I.C. BOMMANAHALLI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant case, Petitioners have sought for a mandamus, directing the Respondents 1 to 5 to restore the Petitioners' residential building over its lands in CTS Nos. 1331 to 1333 and CTS Nos. 1488, 1489 and 1346 in Basavana Bagewadi, Bijapur District, forthwith and further sought for a direction, directing the Respondents 1 to 5 to suitably compensate the Petitioners and pay exemplary costs for the damage caused to the Petitioners' properly, in the interest of justice.

(2.) THE grievance of these two Petitioners in the instant writ petition is that, the first Petitioner had purchased the property bearing CTS Nos. 1331, 1332 and 1333 under registered sale deeds dated 1st February 1988, 1st February 1988 and 23rd July 1986 respectively and that, the said Petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same since then. Thereafter, the first Petitioner has obtained the sanctioned plan from the then Town Municipality, now called as Town Panchayath, Basavana Bagewadi on 11th December 1996 and constructed the building as per the plan sanctioned to him by the Office of the predecessor of the fourth Respondent and that, there is neither any encroachment of municipal property nor the construction put up by the said Petitioner is an un -authorized one. Similarly, the second Petitioner after obtaining sanctioned plan dated 7th September 1996, has put up the construction on the premises in question. The further case of second Petitioner is that, he has never encroached the property belonging to the fourth Respondent and that, after completion of the building, both these Petitioners have occupied their respective portions and have been paying necessary taxes assessed before the fourth Respondent and that, they have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same over the past several decades. When things stood thus, to the shock and surprise of the Petitioners, the Respondents 2 to 5 have arbitrarily and indiscriminately demolished the Petitioners' structures under the guise of widening the road and encroachments alleged to be made by Petitioners, on 26th June 2005 and baking law in their own hands have illegally demolished the structures put up by Petitioners without recourse to due process of law and without following the procedure prescribed under the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules. The alleged demolition carried out by Respondents 1 to 5 under the guise of widening the roads in respect of the residential buildings put up by Petitioners is against the principles of natural justice. If prior notice of the same had been issued to the Petitioners, they would have substantiated their case by producing supporting documents. Therefore, the action of Respondents is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, being aggrieved by the same, Petitioners herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition, seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra.

(3.) IN the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the writ petition filed by Petitioners stands disposed of reserving liberty to Petitioners to redress their grievance before the appropriate competent legal forum by submitting detailed consolidated representations, furnishing all the particulars along with authenticated documents, to substantiate their grievances, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.