IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.9576/2019 (GM-RES) Between:
Sri. Kiran Hegde S/o Sri. Shivaramaiah Aged about 40 years No.170, 2nd Cross 1st Block, Koramangala Bengaluru – 560 034. ... Petitioner (By Sri Harish H.V., Advocate) And:
1. Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Represented by its Commissioner Hudson Circle Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Joint Commissioner Office of the BBMP Madhavan Park 1st Block, Jayanagar Bengaluru – 560 011.
3. The Health Officer Office of the BBMP Madhavan Park 1st Block, Jayanagar Bengaluru – 560 011. … Respondents (By Sri Amit Deshpande, Advocate) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to grant trade licence as per his application dated 31.12.2018 vide Annexure-A and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner had applied for issuance of trade licence as per the application at Annexure-A dated 31.12.2018. The petitioner states that the requisite fee has been remitted as per the receipt dated 02.01.2019 for issuance of the trade licence to enable him to run the service apartments and a bakery.
2. The petitioner states that despite the application being filed, no action has been taken till filing of the writ petition. The petitioner further contends that there is no legal embargo on the respondent-BBMP to consider the application made by him and to grant the trade licence. It is further contended that in so far as the request for grant of trade licence for running the bakery, the same is permissible in the light of the notification issued by the Urban Development Department dated 20.03.2015 as running of a bakery is permissible activity as it is classified under land used as ‘C-1’ in the revised Master Plan- 2015.
3. The petitioner further contends that without prejudice to his contentions, he is entitled for the benefit of deemed licence in terms of Section 443 (10) of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. However, the petitioner states that without prejudice to his other contentions that the respondent-Authority may be directed to take a decision expeditiously as regards the application submitted by him.
4. The question as to the permissibility of the grant of trade licence for running the bakery and service of apartments would entail factual adjudication, which is best left to be determined by the respondent-
Authority. The respondent-BBMP is directed to hear the petitioner and afford an opportunity for personal hearing before deciding on the grant of trade licence. A final adjudication of the dispute would require the respondent-BBMP to consider the application for grant of trade licence filed by the petitioner incidentally as regards permissibility of carrying on the proposed activity at the location, keeping in mind, the directions passed in W.P.No.3676/2018, the application, Zoning Regulations, revised Master Plan-2015 and also the Notification dated 20.03.2015 bearing No.UDD 105 MNJ 2008, Bengaluru and such circulars as may have a bearing. Such consideration to be completed expeditiously within a period, but not later than five weeks from today.
5. The petitioner to appear before the Commissioner-BBMP to avail of the opportunity of personal hearing as referred to above on 08.04.2019 at 11.00 a.m. The application of the petitioner for issuance of trade licence would be considered for the financial year commencing from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020.
6. If no orders are passed within a period of five weeks, the respondent-BBMP would not take any coercive steps as against the petitioner, pending consideration of the application by it.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of, subject to the above observations.
Sd/- JUDGE NR/-