Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 37628
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 22034 OF 2022 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
SRI. VENKATESH V S/O LATE VENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS RA/T NO.11, SRI SAI NIVAS
1ST CROSS ROAD, BANAGIRINAGAR BSK 3RD STAGE BANGALORE 560 085.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUNIL RAO, ADVOCATE A/W Digitally signed by JUANITA SRI. AKASH V T.,ADVOCATE)
THEJESWINI Location:
HIGH COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
1. B B M P REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE 560 002.
2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING (SOUTH)
BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE BANGALORE 560 002.
3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING (SOUTH)
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN JAYANAGARA 2ND BLOCK BANGALORE -560 001.
4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE BANASHANKARI SUB DIVISION YEDIYUR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX S KARIYAPPA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 070. 5. SRI SHASHANK D S/O SRI P H DAYANANDA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS RA/T 1, 1ST CROSS SAI BABA ROAD, BANAGIRINAGAR BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE 560 085.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B V MURALIDHAR.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI. BHADRINATH R., ADVOCATE FOR R5)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R- 1 TO R-4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED
12.10.2022 AND 20.10.2022 OF PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-A. B, C, D; DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 TO DEMOLISH THE CONSTRUCTION PUT UP BY THE R-5 IN DEVIATION OR VIOLATION OF SANCTION PLAN; DIRECT THE R-1 TO INITIATE ACTION AGAINST R-2 TO 4 FOR PERMITTING THE R-5 TO PUT UP CONSTRUCTION IN VIOLATION OF SANCTION PLAN.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The petitioner is the complainant who had brought to the notice of the respondent - BBMP that the fifth respondent is putting up construction in blatant violation of the sanctioned plan and the building bylaws of the respondent - BBMP. When action was sought to be taken by the respondent -BBMP, it appears that the fifth respondent approached the City Civil Court in O.S.No.26294/2022 and it appears that an order of temporary injunction was granted by the City Civil Court directing the respondent - BBMP not to proceed with demolition of any portion of the property belonging to the fifth respondent.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fifth respondent has not only violated the sanctioned plan but has also taken advantage of the order of temporary injunction granted by the City Civil Court and proceeded to further put up construction, inspite of the notices having been issued by the respondent - BBMP, calling upon the fifth respondent to answer why action should not be taken against him for putting up construction in violation of the sanctioned plan. This, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, requires serious consideration at the hands of this court and appropriate orders have to be passed against the fifth respondent.
3. However, during the course of this proceedings, it was also brought to the notice of the court that the fifth respondent has approached the Chief Commissioner of the BBMP by preferring an appeal in Appeal No.53/2023 calling in question the confirmation orders passed by the competent authority under the provisions of the The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (for short 'the BBMP Act').
4. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsels and on perusal of the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that since the matter is now before the Chief Commissioner of BBMP, the said Authority is empowered to consider the contentions of the rival claimants to find out as to whether the fifth respondent has put up construction in violation of the sanctioned plan and the building bylaws of the BBMP and is also empowered to take action to remove the deviated portion. Of course, the fifth respondent is also entitled to seek compounding of the deviated portion within the permissible limits. In that view of the matter, the prayer made in the writ petition will not survive for consideration.
5. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to the Chief Commissioner, BBMP to proceed to consider the appeal filed by the fifth respondent, hear the parties including the petitioner herein, who is the complainant and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The petitioner and the fifth respondent are directed to appear before the Chief Commissioner on 17.06.2023 without waiting for further notice. The Chief Commissioner shall take note of the observations made hereinabove and proceed to pass the orders as directed. The fifth respondent is cautioned, that if he puts any further construction, it would not only be at his risk. The Chief Commissioner shall take note of the observations made by this Court and pass orders penalizing the fifth respondent accordingly, if found necessary.
