IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.31327 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SMT MADHURI H W/O SRI.D.HARI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.4/1 2ND FLOOR 1ST MAIN BHUVANAPPA LAYOUT DRC POST HOSUR ROAD BANGALORE-29. … PETITIONER (By MR.D RAGHU PRAKASH, ADV.) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (URBAN DIST) FOURTH FLOOR, D C OFFICE BUILDING REVENUE COMPLEX K.G.ROAD BANGALORE-560009.
2. THE TASILDAR ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMISSIONER KANDAYA BHAVAN, REVENUE COMPLEX, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560009.
4. SRI BALAJI AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS S/O LATE THIMMA NAIDU R/AT NO.2, ITTAMADU MAIN ROAD MARUTHI NAGAR BSK 3RD STAGE BANGALORE-560085.
5. SRI NARAYANASWAMY AGED MAJOR S/O NOT KNOWN COUNSELOR HEBBAGUDI CMC, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT BANGALORE-560099.
(By MR. Y D HARSHA, AGA FOR R1-R3 MR. KRISHNA MURTHY M R, ADV. FOR R4) - - -
… RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT R-1, 2, 3 TO REMOVE THE ILLEAL WATER CHANNELS FORMED ON THE ROADS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY BY THE R-4 WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE ESTABLISHED UNDER LAW BY CONSIDERING LETTERS DTD:29.6.2017 WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-J, K, L AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.D.Raghu Prakash Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Sri.Krishna Murthy M.R., learned counsel for the respondent No.4.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to remove the illegal water channels formed on the roads adjacent to the property by the respondent No.4 without following the procedure established under law by considering letters dated 29.6.2017 which is at Annexures-J, K and L.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation with regard to her grievance to the competent authority. Needless to state that if such a representation is made, the competent authority shall decide the same within four months from the date of receipt of such representation by a speaking order in accordance with law. Till then, interim order, if any, shall continue. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV