Petitioner, owner of the immovable property No. 287, 5th ‘C’ Cross, II Stage, Nagarabhavi, Bangalore, made a representation dated 4.11.2014 to the respondent Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, for short ‘BBMP’ over his neighbour the 4th respondent erecting construction of a building on site No.288 in violation of the building plan sanctioned for residential purpose and the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Byelaws 2003, for short ‘Byelaws’, impinging upon petitioner’s easementary rights. The respondent continued to carry on the illegal construction while the 4th respondents Commissioner of ‘BBMP’; Assistant Executive Engineer of Laggere Subdivision; and Rajarajeshwarinagar Subdivision; did not prevent the illegal construction. Oral enquiries of the petitioner with the 3rd respondent was responded to stating that it was for the 2nd respondent to consider the complaint. Petitioner’s applications dated 18.1.2014 and 28.1.2014, Annexures-F & G, to the 3rd respondent under the Right to Information Act, 2005, to furnish certified copies of the building plan sanction was responded to by reply dated 4.2.2014 Annexure-H, informing the petitioner that property No.288 fell within the territorial jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent, Assistant Executive Engineer, Laggere Subdivision, who was directed to furnish the plan. The 2nd respondent in his correspondences directed payment of a certain sum of money for issue of the certified copy of the plan, asserting that the schedule property fell within his jurisdiction, while letter two days thereafter, i.e., on 26.2.2014 Annexure-K, of the Assistant Revenue Officer, stated that the property bearing No.288 did not fall within its jurisdiction. The 2nd respondent, thereafter wards, is said to have furnished a copy of the building plan sanction permitting the 4th respondent to put up a structure consisting of ground, first and second floor, for residential purpose, bearing LP No.1356, which was not certified by the 2nd respondent on the premise that the original was issued by the 3rd respondent. Petitioner’s further request to certify the plan, was responded to by reply dated 6.3.2014 Annexure-M, stating that the 3rd respondent did not issue any such plan.

2. It is the allegation of the petitioner that 4th respondent without obtaining a sanction of a building plan has put up construction of six floors [actually five floors according to learned Counsel for the petitioner], consisting of stilt, ground, first, second and third floors. It is further alleged that though the sanction was for construction of a residential building and a shop, nevertheless, 4th respondent put up a commercial complex, as indicated in the positive photographs Annexure-N series. According to the petitioner, respondents 1 to 3 colluded with the 4th respondent, and did not prevent construction of the illegal building, but assisted the 4th respondent in the erection of the building contrary to the sanction accorded, and when objections were filed did not consider the same. Hence this petition, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following reliefs:

“a. Call for the records in respect of the Schedule Property from the file of the Respondents 1 to 3;

b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, similar Writ, Order or Direction and Direct the Respondent No1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 04.01.2014 and 17.01.2014 as at Annexure-D and E to the present Writ Petition in accordance with law and expeditiously;

c. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, similar

d. Issue such other Order/s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case including an Order as to the costs of the present Writ Petition.”

Writ, Order or Direction and Direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to demolish the construction put up illegally over the Schedule Property;

3. Petition, when heard on 15.10.2014, ‘BBMP’ was directed to furnish copies of the building plan, the purpose for which site was earmarked in the CDP, date of is