DIST: U.K v. DHARWAD BENCH
Case at a glance
- Bench
- RAVI V HOSMANI
Outcome
Disposed of
Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 s. 64(a)
- Karnataka Forest Act s. 73(d)
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In reply, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner would undertake to cooperate for early conclusion of enquiry without seeking adjournment. In view of above, following: ORDER Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent no.3 to conclude enquiry under Section 64 A of Forest…
Judgment
SRI MOSHIN S/O. SAYYAD PHIR SAB, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. ARENDUR, PO: KAVANCHOUR, TQ: SIDDAPUR, DIST: U.K., 581355. (BY SRI RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, SIDDAPUR RANGE, TQ: SIDDAPUR, DIST: U.K, 581329.
THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, SIRSI, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: U.K, 581329. …PETITIONER
THE RANGE OF FOREST OFFICER, SIDDAPUR RANGE, TQ: SIDDAPUR, DIST: U.K., 581329.
SRI ABDUL SUBAN KARIM SAB, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. ARENDUR, PO: KAVANCHOUR, TQ: SIDDAPUR, DIST: U.K, 581355. BHARATHI H M BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3, NOTICE TO R4 DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1, TO COMPLETE THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 64(A) OF THE KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963, AGAINST THE PETITIONER, BY FIXING OUTER LIMIT. - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4676 WP No. 100949 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking for following relief: Issue writ of Mandamus directing Respondent no.1, to complete the proceedings initiated under Section 64(a) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, against the petitioner, by fixing outer limit.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned AGA for respondents.
3. Sri Ravi Hegde, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was a resident of Arendur village within which Forest Sy.no.67 would lie. On 29.10.2020, respondent no.3 had filed FIR alleging that petitioner as well as respondent no.4 had illegally encroached on said Forest Sy.no.67 and constructed house/sheds. It was submitted that criminal proceedings initiated against petitioner as well as respondent no.4 in CC no.3192/2021 ended in imposition of sentence of fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 73(d) of Karnataka Forest Act. Apart from said proceedings, respondent no.3 had initiated proceedings against petitioner and respondent no.4 - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4676 WP No. 100949 of 2024 under Section 64 of Forest Act for eviction. It was submitted, as per record, respondents had seized constructions illegally put up on forest land, but during pendency of proceedings respondent no.3 had, illegally permitted respondent no.4 to reoccupy premises, while denying same to petitioner. It was also submitted, respondent no.3 was not proceeding with enquiry which was causing prejudice. On above grounds, petitioner was seeking for direction for early conclusion of enquiry.
4. On other hand, learned AGA for respondents sought to oppose petition. It was submitted that proceedings having been initiated, next date fixed was 13.03.2024 and that enquiry could not be concluded on account of petitioner seeking time.
Operative part
In reply, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner would undertake to cooperate for early conclusion of enquiry without seeking adjournment. In view of above, following: ORDER Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent no.3 to conclude enquiry under Section 64 A of Forest Act - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4676 WP No. 100949 of 2024 within outer limit of eight weeks from 13.03.2024, but in accordance with law. Petitioner shall cooperate for same. It would also be appropriate to direct respondent no.3 not to delay any similar proceedings before it and strive to dispose of as soon as possible and thereby avoid driving parties to seek recourse this Court unnecessarily. Sd/- JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Writ petition is disposed of directing respondent
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 — s. 64(a); Karnataka Forest Act — s. 73(d).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.