S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
Sugar Therapy – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner And Another – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner is stated to be running a Caf in the property bearing No.33/12 situated at Xavier Layout, Victoria Road, Bengaluru.
2. The petitioner states that she has obtained the occupancy rights after entering into an agreement of lease with the owner of the property. It is further submitted that the trade licence has been obtained which is valid till 31.03.2020. The petitioner submits that the other requisite permissions from Departments, including Food Safety And Standards Authority of India have been obtained.
3. The petitioner submits that after issuance of notice at Annexure-F dated 07.01.2020 observing that no parking facilities are provided and that there is noise pollution resulting in inconvenience to the neighbours, a reply came to be made out at Annexure-G dated 16.01.2020, but without considering the said reply, the order at Annexure-H dated 27.01.2020 is passed, which is styled as notice.
4. Upon notice, learned counsel appearing for respondent Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has filed the statement of objections and submits that Karnataka State Pollution Control Board after carrying out necessary tests has arrived at a finding that the noise l
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.