1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WRIT PETITION No.44268 OF 2017 (LB-RES) BETWEEN:
SHRI G DEVARAJE GOWDA KDP MEMBER ZILLA PANCHAYATH HASSAN ANNAPOORNESHWARI NILAYA NEAR KALLATHAGIRI CIRCLE DODDI ROAD RAVINDRA NAGAR HASSAN-573201 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI: VISWANATHA SETTY V, ADV) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN-573201 2. THE COMMISSIONER HASSAN MUNICIPALITY HASSAN TOWN & DISTRICT-573 201 3. SHRI M S RANGE GOWDA S/O SIDDE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 4. SHRI SHIVANANJE GOWDA S/O SIDDE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 ARE R/AT MAHADEVARAHALLI VILLAGE KORAVANGALA POST, DUDDA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573201 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI:A K VASANTH, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO TAKE ACTION AGIANST THE RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 IN PURSUANCE OF NOTICE DATED 29.8.2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-H AND DEMOLISH ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION MADE BY THE RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 IN THEIR PROPERTY BEARING SITE NO.2229, KHATHA NO.2024, NEW NO.1730/1871 SAS 895 AND AR NO.2228 KHATHA NO.2023 SITUATED AT KHB COLONY, RAVINDRANATHNAGARA, WARD NO.9, HASSAN TOWN BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC., THIS WP COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Mr.Viswanatha Setty, Adv. for Petitioner.
Mr.A K Vasanth, AGA for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
1. The petitioner claiming to be the member of ‘Karnataka Development Programs Inspection Committee,’ Hassan District appointed by the State Government has approached this Court against the alleged illegal construction raised by the private respondent Nos.3 and 4 – Shri.M S Range Gowda and Shri.Shivananje Gowda in Dudda Hobli, Hassan Taluk and District.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon to the joint spot inspection report dated 30.08.2017 carried out by the Town Planning member of Urban Development Authority, Hassan and the Commissioner of Urban Development Officer, Hassan, a copy of the said report is placed on record at Annexure-J with the writ petition.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since no action is being taken by the City Municipal Council, Hassan, despite the said joint spot inspection carried out and a finding is given to the effect that the construction put up by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 is illegal, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing this petition in the Court on 20.09.2017.
4. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that it is too pre- mature for this Court to interfere with the matter, as the said joint spot inspection report were prepared upon the said inspection by two authorities only in the recent past on 30.08.2017. The petitioner is of course free to approach the concerned authority of City Municipal Council to initiate action in the matter and it is expected that the concerned authority to invoke due process of law including providing an opportunity to the concerned affected parties, namely, respondent Nos.3 and 4 named above. The interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage is not considered necessary or appropriate. Therefore, with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, the petition is disposed of by relegating them before the concerned authority of City Municipal Council, Hassan.
With these observations, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE *bgn/-