Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 84 (KAR)

Rangaswamy v. State of Karnataka

2009-01-30

P.D.DINAKARAN, V.G.SABHAHIT

body2009
Judgment :- P.D. Dinakaran, C.J. The petitioners are residents of Hejjige and Thoremavu Villages, which are located within Nanjangud Taluk at Mysore District. Nanjangud Taluk is located on the banks of river Kapila and has got religious importance as there is an ancient temple of Lord Shiva. The devotees all over the country visit these villages, for religious pilgrimage, which are located across the river Kapila. The residents, pilgrims and devotees only depend upon water transport facility to ply `to and fro’ to Nanjangud. But, unfortunately, there is no ferry service available not only to the villagers but also to the public at large. Hence, they have moved the above public interest litigation for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to provide public water transport in the Kapila river basis between Hejjige Village and Nanjangud Town i.e., to run such public ferry service, by means of auctioning the right to do so by engaging competent person/s who owns or possess motor boat duly certified by the authorities under the Inland Vessels Act, 1917 and who is/are legally qualified and competent to ply in the said river basis as a means of public water transport. 2. While respondents 2, 3 and 4 are Zilla, Taluk and Grama Panchayats who come under the jurisdiction of the first respondent-Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, the 5th respondent is the Town Municipality of Nanjangud, the 6th and 7th respondents are the Competent Authorities under the provisions of Inland Vessels Act, 1917 and Mysore Harbour Craft Rules, 1963. 3. The grievance of the petitioners is that even though the sixth respondent gave competency certificate to two persons as early as in January 2007 for plying water vessels in Kapila river and licences are also issued to them, no inland transport is made available to the public at large and as a result, there is deficiency of service to the public at large. 4. The learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of respondents 1, 6 and 7. 5. We heard the learned Counsel appearing on both the sides. 4. The learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of respondents 1, 6 and 7. 5. We heard the learned Counsel appearing on both the sides. 6.1 Section 58 read with Schedule I of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short hereinafter referred to as the `Act') deals with the functions of Grama Panchayat; Section 145 read with Schedule II deals with the functions of the Taluk Panchayat and Section 184 read with Schedule III deals with the functions of Zilla Panchayat. Chapter XVI deals with inspection and supervision powers and it empowers the Government under Sections 232, 233, 234, 235 and 236 to inspect and supervise the performance of the duties of Grama Panchayat, Taluk Panchayat and Zilla Panchayat and to enquire into the affairs of the Grama Panchayat, Taluk Panchayat and Zilla Panchayat and if there is any deficiency in performance of duties by the Zilla Panchayat, the Government is empowered to direct or require the Zilla Panchayat to perform such duties of the Zilla Panchayat wherever Zilla Panchayat commits any default in performance of its duties and the Government is also empowered to direct the Zilla Panchayat to perform such duties within a prescribed time. 6.2 Even though Schedules I, II and III originally do not deal with the identification of waterways suitable for regular ferry services, by exercising power under Section 312 of the Act, the State Government by notification dated 18th August, 2003 amended Schedules I, II and III of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act with reference to Sections 58, 145 and 184 respectively, as referred to above. 6.3 As per the said notification dated 18th August, 2003, the Zilla Panchayat is empowered in the matter of development of waterways, ferrying ferry services etc., (i) to identify waterways suitable for construction of jetties for ferry services; (ii) purchase ferries and contract private operators for ferry services; and (iii) deepen and dredge waterways and regulate ferry services and the Taluka Panchayats is empowered to inspect ferries and boats and maintain vigilance on services and traffic regulations. But unfortunately, despite the said amendment, these provisions which empowered the Taluk and Zilla Panchayats remain dead letters nor the Government has shown any interest to exercise the powers conferred on it under Sections 232, 233, 234, 235 and 236 provided under Chapter XVI of the Act which requires to identify the lapses and defaults on the part of the Zilla and Taluk Panchayats and to require them to perform their duties within the specified period. 6.4 These lapses on the part of the Grama Panchayat and the authorities concerned including the Government made the petitioners to approach this Court for issue of writ as prayed for in this public interest litigation. 7. We are convinced that there is lapse on the part of the authorities concerned as referred to above, but, under the facts and circumstances of the case, it is suffice to direct the first respondent to invoke the powers conferred on them under Chapter XVI of the Act vide Sections 232, 233, 234, 235 and 236 and set the law on motion in this regard within the prescribed time. The writ petition is ordered accordingly.