Writ Petition No. 27491 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 27491 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: MR FRANCIS VAS S/O LATE BELCHER VAS, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT 1-142, VAS COMPOUND, MARIPALLA, PUDU VILLAGE AND POST, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 143 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RENSPRE PRITHESH DSOUZA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PUDU VILLAGE, FARANGIPET, BANTWAL TALUK - 574 143
Legal Reasoning
Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYAT BANTWAL, BATWAL, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 219 3. MR WALTER NORONHA S/O LATE HILLARY NORONHA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT THRAPTI HOUSE, MARIPALLA PUDU VILLAGE AND POST, BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT - 574 143
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. SHARANJITH SHETTY K., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 SRI. P. UDAYASHANKAR PAI, ADVOCATE FOR R3) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 30.09.2024 BEARING REFERENCE NO. KRAMANKA PU.GRA.PAN.C.R.41/2024-25 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. QUASH THE COMMUNICATION / DIRECTIONS DATED 25.09.2024 BEARING REFERENCE NO. THA.PAN/BAN/DU.A/2024-25(A4) ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-B. GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY OF THE OPERATION OF THE NOTICE DATED 30.09.2024 ISSUED BY R-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN PURSUANCE OF THE COMMUNICATION / DIRECTION DATED 25.09.2024 ISSUED BY R-2 VIDE ANNX-B, RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENTS FROM TAKING ANY FURTHER COERCIVE ACTIONS TO PULL DOWN, LOP OR CUT DOWN THE DISPUTED COCONUT TREE SITUATED ON THE NORTH EASTERN SIDE OF THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the notice at Annexure-'A' dated 30.09.2024. The notice at Annexure-'A' is issued to the petitioner and it is narrated that on inspection of property belonging to the petitioner, it was found that no steps were taken. It is further submitted that on 25.09.2024, the Executive Officer has also visited the spot and directed the petitioner that coconut trees are required to be removed and that the petitioner would be liable for all consequences in the event - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 of any danger. It is further observed that the issue of water flowing into the neighbour's property is also a matter that is to be looked into, failing which, necessary steps would be taken in terms of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 ('the Act' for short). Finally, the notice calls upon the petitioner to take necessary action within seven days of the date of notice, as action earlier suggested has not been heeded to. 2. The report of the Executive Officer of Taluk Panchayat at Annexure-'B' to the Panchayat Development Officer details the results of spot inspection and directs the Panchayat Development Officer to take necessary action. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised various grounds including that the trees are fruit bearing coconut trees which are still healthy and strongly rooted and situated within the precincts of petitioner's property. It is further submitted that the proceedings are one sided. It is submitted that the decision is based only on the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 apprehension at the instance of direction at Annexure-'B' without applying his mind independently. 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3, who is a private respondent submits that the notice at Annexure-'A' and report at Annexure-'B' are only after spot inspection and the Authorities are bound to act so as to safeguard the property and life. As the property is situated in the coastal region consisting of coconut trees which are 45 years old, there is a strong possibility during monsoon that the trees may fall resulting danger to the property and life. 5. It must be seen that Section 74 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act provides for removal of trees which constitute danger to persons. Section 74(1) reads as follows:- "74. Removal of structures, trees etc., which are in ruins or likely to fall.- (1) If it appears at any time to the Grama Panchayat that any building or any part thereof or any tree or branch of a tree is in a ruinous state or is likely to fall or is in any other - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 way dangerous to any person occupying, resorting to or passing by such building or the part thereof, or the tree or the branch of the tree, the Grama Panchayat may by written notice require the owner or occupier of such building or trees, as the case may be,- (i) to pull down, lop or cut down; or (ii) to secure; or (iii) to remove; or (iv) to repair; such building or part of it or the tree or the branch of the tree, as the case may be, and to prevent all causes of danger therefrom. 6. It is necessary that there must be satisfaction of the Grama Panchayat that the tree is either (a) in a ruinous state or (b) likely to fall or (c) in any other way dangerous to any person occupying, resorting to or (d) passing by such building or the part thereof. 7. Needless to state that Section 74 of the Act would also have within its fold danger of a tree to the neighbouring property. There is further power under Section 74(2) if no action is taken despite direction passed under Section 74(1) of the Act. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is in a position to demonstrate that the trees are strongly rooted and the apprehension of private respondent is unfounded. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent has submitted otherwise. 10. It is necessary in the context of complaint of the private respondent that the Gram Panchayat is to take assistance of an Official of Horticulture Department and record a finding as to whether the trees are in a ruinous state or there is likelihood of it to fall so as to constitute danger to the neighbours. Such opinion to be arrived at after hearing all the concerned and having expert assistance of an Official of the Horticulture Department. 10. Accordingly, the notice at Annexure-'A' dated 30.09.2024 is set aside. The Gram Panchayat is to take a decision as to whether the tree requires removal or cutting down in terms of Section 74 of the Act. Such decision is to - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10949 WP No. 27491 of 2024 be taken in terms of the observations made hereinabove, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 11. Needless to state that Gram Panchayat while exercising its power under Section 74 of the Act is at liberty to take opinion of other experts as may be founded appropriate. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VGR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71