M RAVINDRA NATH vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & ORS.

The petitioner-M.Ravindra Nath S/o D.Mamjappa has filed this writ petition in this Court on 14.12.2017 with the following prayers:

i. Setting aside/quashing the order dated 07.12.2017 passed by the 1st respondent in case No.MAG- CR.80/2017/66481 (Annexure-D).

ii. Further grant any such other relief that this Hon''ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

The petitioner has assailed the order passed by Respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner and the District Magistrate, Shivamogga, allowing the

application of petitioner-MESCOM to execute the work of supplying power to Respondent No.3 herein which is a Steel Industry

M/s.Ramamurthy Mineral and Metal Pvt. Ltd. The operative portion of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner on 07.12.2017 is quoted

below for ready reference:

ORDER

The petition of the petitioner is allowed. The petitioner is permitted to proceed with the execution of the work of supplying power to the industry

of respondent No.1 situated at Navile Basavapura, covered under the sanctioned order passed by the petitioner dated 19.02.2014 and for the

purpose it is also ordered for the removal of the obstruction of the 2nd respondent, as prayed for.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before the Court that even though an Injunction Suit O.S.No.478/2014 instituted by the

petitioner M.Ravindra Nath is pending before the Court of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Bhadravathi, Shivamogga, in which a

temporary injunction order has been passed by the Trial Court on 05.12.2014, the 1st Respondent-Deputy Commissioner has passed the

impugned order permitting the petitioner-MESCOM to proceed with the execution of the work of laying down the transmission lines for the benefit

of Respondent No.3-Steel Company, which is not a legally sustainable order and therefore, the same deserves to be quashed by this Court.

The learned counsel for the Respondents have opposed the submissions and urged before the Court that in view of the pendency of the civil suit,

the present petition cannot be entertained.

Having heard the learned counsels, this Court is of the considered opinion that the litigation for the same cause including incidental and ancillary

subsequent causes cannot be allowed to be scattered in different Tribunals, Forums or different Courts. The salutary purpose behind this is to

avoid the chances of passing conflicting orders by different Forums, Courts or Tribunals. Since the petitioner''s same grievance against the

MESCOM is admittedly pending adjudication in the Trial Court in O.S.N.478/2014 even the subsequent order passed by the Deputy

Commissioner in the same cause could be assailed by the petitioner/plaintiff before the same Trial Court, if necessary, by undertaking suitable

amendment procedure and impleadment procedure. To avoid such process in the trial of the suit, the petitioner cannot be permitted to invoke the

extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Such misconceived petitions actually add unnecessary burden

of the constitutional Courts and result in chances of passing conflicting orders or over-riding orders and may amount to interference in the Trial of

Civil Court. Therefore, such writ petitions deserves to be dismissed at the threshold itself. The present writ petition is therefore dismissed with the

aforesaid liberty to the petitioner. No costs.