IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.50335-50336/2018 (LB BMP) BETWEEN 1. SAVITHRAMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, WIFE OF H KARIYAPPA NO.1267, 12 C CROSS, 9TH MAIN, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE-86 2. TRIVENI MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST AND EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, ESTABLISHED UNDER KARNATAKA TRUST ACT, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: 28/29, MALLASANDRA VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA ROAD, YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY K MANJUNATH SON OF KARIYAPPA 36 YEARS ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI G.SANJAY, ADV. FOR SRI D R RAVISHANKAR, ADV.) AND 1. THE BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHAT WATER DRAIN DASARAHALLI DIVISION BBMP, 9TH FLOOR JAYANAGARA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BENGALURU-560 011.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BWSSB, T DASARAHALLI SUB DIVISION DASARAHALLI ZONE, BENGALURU-560 073 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K N PUTTEGOWDA, ADV. FOR R1 & R2, SRI SHRINIVAS B.S, ADV. FOR SRI B.L SANJEEV, ADV. FOR R3.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DTD:11.10.2018 ANENXURE-H ISSUED BY THE R-2 IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION OR OTHERWISE ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents-Palike.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that it is the owner of all that piece and parcel of land comprised in survey No.39 of Bagalgunte village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, measuring 4 acre 2 guntas. The petitioner had put-up construction and in order to facilitate the outflow of rain water during heavy rains, it had constructed a drain as the property used to get inundated during the rains on account of the topography of the land. That the drain constructed is purely a private construction put-up by the petitioner and is neither a Raja Kaluve nor a storm water drain put up by the respondent-Palike. That in the circumstances, the respondents-Palike issued a notice vide annexure-H calling upon the petitioner to adhere to the buffer zone, in view of the presence of the Raja Kaluve. It is submitted that the objections were preferred by the petitioner to the said notice.
3. Today, learned counsel for respondents Sri. K.N. Putte Gowda files a memo by enclosing there with a letter dated 16.11.2018 addressed by the Palike to the Joint Director of Land Records requesting the authority to clarify the presence of storm water drain or Raja Kaluve in survey No.39. In reply to the said letter, the Joint Director of Land Records by communication dated 31.12.2018 has clarified that no Raja Kaluve or any storm water drain of BBMP is formed in survey No.39. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the second respondent is also present before the court and that submissions are made on the instructions of second respondent Sri. Shiva Kumar H. The submission of the learned counsel is placed on record and the letters dated 16.11.2018 and 31.12.2018 is also taken on record.
4. In the light of the above clarification issued by the Joint Director of Land Records, the petitions requires to be allowed and impugned notice requires to be intervened with. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed. The notice at Annexure-H dated 11.10.2018 stands quashed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
In view of disposal of the above writ petitions, I.A. 1/2019 does not survive for consideration and is accordingly, disposed off.
Chs* CT-HR Sd/- JUDGE