Back
1997 Supreme(Kar) 307
Karnataka High Court
G.R.NAGARAJ - Appellant
Versus
BANGALORE MAHANAGAR PALIKE - Respondent
Decided On : 06-24-97
W.P. : 16222 of 1995
K.N.Puttegowda, K.N.SUBHA READY
The main legal point established was that construction on public streets and footpaths, meant for public use, must comply with the Municipal Corporations Act and building bye-laws, and unauthorized construction should be removed.
Headnote:
Unauthorised Construction - Public Street - The court directed the corporation not to put up any construction on the public street, including footways, drains, and roadways, as it was in violation of the Municipal Corporations Act and building bye-laws.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought direction to the respondents not to construct on the public street and footpaths, which were meant for public use. The corporation intended to construct shops on the footpath to temporarily rehabilitate persons vacating the old market building.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the proposed construction by the corporation on the footpath was unauthorized and in violation of the Municipal Corporations Act and building bye-laws. The writ petition was allowed, directing the corporation not to put up any construction on the public street and to remove any existing unauthorized constructions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the corporation's proposed construction on the footpath, meant for public use, was authorized under the Municipal Corporations Act and building bye-laws.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 321 of the Municipal Corporations Act, which conferred power on the commissioner to take action to remove unauthorized construction contrary to the approved plan or building regulations. It was held that the corporation should not be permitted to violate the law and construct buildings contrary to the building regulations.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, directing the corporation not to put up any construction on the public street and to remove any existing unauthorized constructions.
( 1 ) IN this public interest litigation, the petitioners have sought for direction to the respondents not to put up any construction on the public street together with the footways, drains, roadways, riding path, passage, thorough fare including drains attached to public street located in between the ashoka pillar road and circle of r. v. road, 2nd block, jayanagar, Bangalore running east to west.
( 2 ) THE case of the petitioners is that the respondent-corporation is attempting to put-up construction on the foot paths which meant for public use. This is not disputed by the corporation. The contention of the corporation is that with a view to construct new market building by demolishing the old market where some of the persons are carrying on the business, the corporation has taken steps to construct shops on the footpath in order to rehabilitate them temporarily. In order to rehabilitate the persons who are 'asked to vacate the shop premises in the old market building, the corporation may take steps to construct the shops in a place where such construction is permitted under the act and the rules.
( 3 ) SECTION 321 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (the act) confers power on the commissioner to take action to remove the unauthorised construction if the said construction is contrary to the licence, approved plan or building regulations. The corporation has also framed bye-laws regulating the construction of buildings in the city of Bangalore. Neither the Provisions of the Act, nor the building bye-laws permit construction of building on footpath either temporarily or otherwise. The corporation is a corporate body conferred with the power to enforce law providing for construction of building. If that is so, the corporation shall not be permitted to violate the law and construct building contrary to the building regulations. The proposed construction by the corporation is on a footpath which is specifically meant for public use. Therefore, the footpath shall not be allowed to be used for any purpose other than the purpose for which it is meant to be used. Such being the case, the proposed construction by the corporation on a footpath is unauthorised.
( 4 ) IN the result, writ petition is allowed directing the corporation not to put-up any construction on the public street together with the footways, drains, roadways, attached to the public street located in between ashoka pillar road and circle of r. v. road, 2nd block, jayanagar, Bangalore, running east to west. If the corporation, has already put-up construction on the above said area, it is directed to remove such constructions forthwith.
--- *** ---
.
