IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.56071/2018 (LB-BMP) Between:
Sri Ramaswamy B.N., S/o Late Sri Ningegowda, Aged about 44 years, R/at No.38/102, Sri Krishna Arcade, Swayam Prabha Road, Meenakshinagara, Basaveshwaranagara, Bengaluru – 560 079.
(By Sri. R.B. Sadashivappa, Advocate) And:
1. The Commissioner, Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), N.R. Square, Bengaluru – 560 002.
2. The Joint Commissioner, Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Rajarajeshwarinagara, Bengaluru – 560 098.
3. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Herohalli Zone, Ward No.72, Bengaluru – 560 072.
… Petitioner 4. Sri Srikantan N.
S/o Sri Nanjundaiah S.N., Aged about 30 years, No.107, 1st Phase, I Block, Banashankari 3rd Stage, Bangalore – 85. … Respondents (By Sri H. Devendrappa, Advocate for R1 to R3; Sri V.B. Shivakumar, Advocate for R4) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the R-1 to R-3 to consider the complaints lodged by the petitioner at Annexures-E, F, G & H and direct the respondents to take suitable action against Sri N. Srikantan in accordance with law and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioner has filed the present petition seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the complaints lodged by the petitioner at Annexures – E, F, G and H and to take necessary action in accordance with law.
2. Petitioner has asserted in the complaint that the proposed impleading applicant has been carrying on construction in violation of the building bye-laws.
3. I.A.1/2019 for impleading filed by Sri. Srikantan with respect to whose construction the petitioner has lodged the complaint is allowed as learned counsel for petitioner states that he has no objection for allowing the said application. Necessary amendment to be carried out to the cause title.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent – BBMP submits that pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner, notice was issued under Section 308 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’) to Sri. Srikantan, who is now permitted to be arrayed as respondent No.4. It is further stated that orders have been passed under Section 321(3) of the Act which was preceded by a provisional order under Section 321(1)(2) of the Act.
5. Without entering into the merits of the illegality pointed out by the petitioner, suffice to state that respondent – BBMP has acted on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner and taken action. In light of same and noticing the memo and documents annexed along with the memo, no further orders are called for.
6. Accordingly, petition is disposed of as requiring no further orders while noticing action taken by respondents.
Sd/- JUDGE VP