IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B. WRIT APPEAL NO. 3908 OF 2016 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN MRS. KIRTIDA M SHET W/O MUKESH.P. SHET AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.855/17, 15TH MAIN, RAJAJINAGAR, 3RD BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 010.
(BY SRI MADHUSUDHAN M N) AND ... APPELLANT 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE B.R. SQUARE BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RAJAJINAGAR SUB DIVISION WARD NO.107, BBMP, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010.
(BY SRI V SREENIDHI, ADVOCATE) ... RESPONDENTS THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN W.P. NO.43335/2016 DATED 30.8.2016.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge, dismissing the petitions filed against the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal.
2. The Corporation issued a notice under Section 321(1), (2) and (3) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, alleging violation of building by-laws and sanctioned building plan.
3. The notice was challenged by the petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the case.
4. When the matter was taken to this court by filing writ petitions, by order dated August 11, 2016, this court directed the Corporation to make a spot inspection of the disputed property.
5. In the inspection conducted, it appeared there has been deviation to the extent of 34.32% per centum contrary to the building by-laws and sanctioned building plan. Consequently, the Hon’ble Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions.
6. We do not find any merit in the writ appeal requiring interference of the order of the Hon’ble Single Judge.
7. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
8. However, it shall be open to the appellant to apply for regularization in accordance with law. We express no opinion on the merits of the matter.
9. We make no order as to costs.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE vgh*