IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WP No.7922/2016 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
SRI N CHANDRA REDDY S/O LATE CHIKKANANJAPPA REDDY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT NO. 79, CHOWDESHWARI TEMPLE STREET MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 037.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI: SIDDAMALLAPPA P M, ADV) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL TOWN PLANNING M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE BANGALORE - 560 002.
3. SRI R RAMAKRISHNA REDDY @ BABU REDDY S/O A RAMACHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT DODDA ABBAIAH REDDY NILAYA CHIKKA RAMAIAH REDDY ROAD NEAR TULASI THEATER MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 037.
4. SRI NEVILLE M VASWANI DIRECTOR M/S VASWANI ESTATES DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, NO. 52, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: A K VASANTH, AGA FOR R1, DR.R RAMACHANDRAN, ADV FOR R2, SMT:SREEVIDYA G K, ADV FOR SRI:T N VISHWANATH, ADV FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPERSENTATION OF THE PETITIONER GIVEN AS PER ANNEX-D.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Mr.P M Siddamalappa, Adv for Petitioner. Mr.A K Vasanth, AGA for R1, Dr.R Ramachandran, Adv for R2, Mrs.Sreevidya G K, Adv for Mr.T N Vishwanath, Adv for R3.
1. The prayers made in the present writ petition is as follows:
“a) To issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner given as per Annexure-D;
b) Issue any other writ or direction or order that could be give fit to be granted in the circumstances of the case by allowing this writ with exemplary cost and in the interest of justice.”
2. The said representation was made on 21.01.2016 vide Annexure-D to respondent No.2 for encroachment of channel next to the agricultural land in Sy.No.91 and 157 situated at Marathalli, Mahadevapura Hobli.
3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Court is satisfied that since the questions of facts are required to be established in the present case, the present petitioner is relegated to avail his remedy in a civil suit. Writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for the said purpose.
The petition is dismissed as not maintainable. No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE *bgn/-
(Sl.No.5)