IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD W.P.No.59485 OF 2016(LB-RES) BETWEEN:
Dr.Narasimha Pai D. S/o.D.Sanjeeva Pai Aged about 42 years, Residing at No.12/1/1, Vaikunta Bhavan, Near Canara High School, Dongerkeri, Mangalore – 575 003. … Petitioner (By Sri S.Rajashekar, Advocate) AND:
1. The Commissioner, Mangalore City Corporation, II Floor, City Corporation Building, Lalbagh, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada District – 575 003.
2. The Town Planning Officer, Mangalore City Corporation, II Floor, City Corporation Building, Lalbagh, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada District – 575 003.
3. The Assistant Town Planning Officer, Mangalore City Corporation, II Floor, City Corporation Building, Lalbagh, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada District – 575 003.
4. Poonam Builders, A Registered Partnership having its office at Shop No.19 and 20, 3rd Floor, Manasa Towers, Kodialbail, Mangalore – 575 003, Represented by its Partner Sri K.Damodar Shenoy, Son of late Ananda Shenoy.
5. K.Damodar Shenoy, Son of late Ananda Shenoy, Aged about 47 years, Residing at A.M.Kamath Compound, M.G.Road, Mangalore Dakshina Kannada District – 575 003. ... Respondents (By Sri K.V.Narasimhan, Advocate for R1: Sri M.Sudhakar Pai, Advocate for R4 and R5: R2 & R3 served) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct R1 to R3 to take suitable action pursuant to the representations dated 26.10.2016 and 07.11.2016 vide Annexures A and B in accordance with law and etc.
This writ petition, coming on for preliminary hearing ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:
“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to take suitable action pursuant to the representations dated 26.10.2016 and 07.11.2016 vide Annexures A and B in accordance with law.
(ii) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 4 and 5 has filed the statement of objections. Along with that, he has also produced the licence issued by the competent authority as Annexure-R2 and the endorsement issued to the petitioner dated 30.11.2016 vide Annexure-R3.
3. In view of the above, since the representations submitted by the petitioner vide Annexures A and B have been considered, this writ petition does not survive for consideration. If the petitioner is still has any grievance, he is at liberty to challenge Annexures R2 and R3, if law permits.
4. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-