IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANASWAMY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.1483 OF 2018 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
SRI.R.PRAKASH, S/O.N.RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, C/O NO.280, SRI.MUNESWARA NILAYA, DODDABOMASANDRA, VIDYARANYAPURA MAIN ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 097.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. BALAJI RAGHUNATHAN, ADV.,) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, N.R.CHOWK, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001.
3. JOINT COMMISSIONER, B.B.M.P, YELAHANKA ZONE, BYATRAYANAPURA, B.B.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 024.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA, BENGALURU-560 009.
5. JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, (OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER), 4TH FLOOR, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560 009.
6. ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER, B.B.M.P, BATRYANAPURA SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU-560 024.
7. BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE, REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, B.B.M.P OFFICE BUILDING, N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R1, 4, & 5, 7) *** THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO (I) SET- ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 2/4/2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.57160/2016. (II) ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION 57160/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT, AS PRAYED FOR.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY P.S. DINESH KUMAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard.
2. This appeal is filed challenging order dated 02.04.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in W.P. No.57160/2016 and connected matters.
3. For the sake of convenience the parties have been referred to as per their status in the writ petition.
4. Petitioner’s case before the Hon’ble Single Judge was that certain structures belonging to the petitioner were demolished. A prayer was made to reconstruct those demolished structures and to compensate him.
5. Hon’ble Single Judge on consideration of the materials on record has held that there exists dispute with regard to location of structures. According to the respondents structures were built on the ‘Raja Kaluve’ and the same were demolished by the State Authorities in compliance with the decision of this Court in W.P.
No.31394/2009. Since the disputed question of facts were involved, the Hon’ble Single Judge, in our considered view, has rightly dismissed the writ petitions.
6. In the circumstance, we see no error in the impugned order. The writ appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE VK