SRI MUNIKRISHNAPPA v. SRI KRISHNAPPA

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO W.A. No.1286/2008 & W.A. No. 459/2010 & W.A. No. 489/2010 (LB-RES) BETWEEN : 1 2 3 SRI MUNIKRISHNAPPA S/O CHENAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT TALAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT SRI CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA @ VENKATARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT TALAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT SRI MUNIVENAKTAPPA S/O CHENNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT TALAHALLI VILLAGE, 2 KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT. ( By Sri. G. PAPI REDDY, ADV.) ...APPELLANTS AND : 1 2 SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O MUNISONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS. SRI HANUMAPPA S/O LATE MUNILAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/AT TALAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT. 3 4 THE PRESIDENT CHIKKBALLAPUR ZILLA PANCHAYAT, CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYAT, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK, CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS ( By Sri. N K RAMESH, ADV. FOR R-1 & R-2, SRI. L.VENKATARAMA REDDY, ADV. FOR R-3 & R-4) These Appeals are filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for concerned records and set aside the order dated 04.06.2008 passed in W.P. No.16235/2007. 3 These writ appeals coming on for Final Hearing this day, K.L.MANJUNATH. J., delivered the following : JUDGMENT These appeals are preferred by the appellants challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.16235/2007 dated 4th June 2008.

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

The admitted facts are as hereunder : The respondent Nos.1 to 2 and one Pillappa filed a petition before the Executive Officer of the Taluk Panchayath, Chikkaballapur stating that the appellants herein have unauthorisedly put up sheds on the lands of them and requested the Taluk Panchayath to take action to remove the unauthorised construction. The Executive Officer as per Annexure 'F' dated 31.07.2006 dismissed the petition on the ground that the land granted to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 by the Grama Panchayath is without jurisdiction and rejected the petition. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed an appeal before the Zilla Panchayath, Kolar in appeal No. 13/2006-07, which appeal also came to be dismissed. Challenging the same, a writ petition was filed before the learned Single Judge. 4

The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the order passed by the Taluk Panchayath and Zilla Panchayath as per Annexures 'F' and 'G' dated 31.07.2006 and

14.08.2007 respectively and this order is called in question in these appeals.

Having heard the learned Counsel for both the parties, we are of the opinion that if the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the grantees of the sites, and if the appellants have constructed sheds on their property, it is for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to approach the Civil Court for their redressal and take possession of the property in accordance with law. Without doing so, they have wrongly approached the Taluk Panchayath as well as Zilla Panchayath. Even if they have filed an application before the Taluk Panchayath, the finding of the Taluk Panchayath that the allotment made in favour of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 by the Grama Panchayath is invalid and incorrect is also liable to be set aside as it was beyond the scope of the Taluk Panchayath, so also Zilla Panchayath.