IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.46154/2018 (LB-RES) BETWEEN:
1. Mr.Mohammed Iqbal, Aged about 58 years, S/o late Abdul Khadar Sab.
2. Mrs.Shaheena Begum, Aged about 50 years, W/o Mr.Mohammed Iqbal.
Both are resident at No.559, Chennamma Temple Road, Chennasandra, K.R.Pura Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, Bengaluru – 560048.
(By Sri.V.Vinod Reddy, Advocate for Sri.G.PapiReddy, Advocate) AND:
1. The Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, N.R.Square, Bengaluru – 560011.
2. The Joint Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Mahadevapura Zone, Mahadevapura, …Petitioners Bengaluru – 560001.
3. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Horamavu Sub-Division, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Bengaluru – 560044.
4. Smt.M.Shylaja, Aged about 26 years, W/o M.Krishnamurthy, No.1, Kariyappa & Sheshappa Colony, E.C.I Church Street, Opp.F.C.I, Dooravani Nagar Post, Bengaluru – 560016.
...Respondents (By Smt.Saritha Kulkarni, Advocate for R1 to 3) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the R-1 to 3 to initiate action against the R-4 by demolishing the illegal construction constructed by the R-4 in the schedule property in violating of Bye-law and sanctioned plan as per the vide Annexure-C and D.
This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioners are stated to be the owners in possession and enjoyment of the house property bearing No.559, Chennamma Temple Road, Chennasandra, K.R.Pura Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk.
2. It is further stated that the respondent No.4 who has property near the petitioners’ property has been putting up construction without obtaining any plan and encroaching public road. The petitioner have made representations to the respondent – BBMP enclosed as Annexures C and D to take action as regards the illegal construction being put up by the respondent No.4.
3. The learned counsel Smt.Saritha Kulkarni appearing on behalf of respondent – BBMP submits that taking note of the complaint made as regards the construction the respondent No.3 has issued notice under Section 321(2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. It is further submitted upon instructions that the order had been passed under Section 321(3) and consequential action has been initiated for demolition under Section 462 of the Act.
4. In the light of the said statement made and taking note of the memo filed by learned counsel for respondent – BBMP no further orders are required to be passed. In view of the disposal of the petition taking note of the undertaking by respondent – BBMP question of awaiting service of notice on respondent No.3 would not arise as no order prejudicial to the interest of the respondent No.3 is been passed. Needless to state that the respondent – BBMP to continue to take further action in accordance with law till the violation that is pointed out if ascertained to be correct is rectified.
Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Contentions of the party are kept open.
Sd/- JUDGE NS