Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 33676
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M.I.ARUN, J
MR. SHANKAR SUVARNA – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 52005 OF 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. RAJESH SHETTIGAR
For the Respondents: SRI.K.PRASAD HEGDE
A demolition order issued without providing the affected party an opportunity to be heard violates the principles of natural justice.
Headnote:This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging a demolition order dated 10.10.2019 for lack of opportunity to be heard. The respondent contended compliance with prior complaints, yet failed to adhere to due process. The Court found the order invalid for not affording the petitioner a hearing, ultimately allowing the petition and setting aside the demolition order.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court found no opportunity was given for a hearing. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. discussion of previous complaints and orders. (Para 2) |
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has challenged the demolition order passed against his property by virtue of the impugned order dated 10.10.2019, by the respondent (Annexure A to the writ petition). The same is challenged on the ground that there was no opportunity of hearing given to the petitioner.
2. The respondent contends that, one Mahesh Shetty complained against the construction being done by the petitioner and he also preferred Writ Petition No.9511 of 2019 (LB-RES) and as per the orders passed in Writ Petition No. 9511 of 2019 ON 09.09.2019, the impugned demolition order has been passed by the respondent. 3. In Writ Petition No. 9511/2019, the following order has been passed:
"6. Detailed narration of facts would not call for any reiteration. Pursuant to the representations of the petitioner, the respondent has already initiated proceedings under Section 187 of the Act by issuing notices to Sri. Shanker Suvarna on 20.5.2017 and 24.10.2017 vide Annexures-A and D. Till today, no action has been taken by the respondent under Section
187 of the Act.
7. Under the circumstances, it would suffice to direct the respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner vide Annexures-E, F and G and complete the proceedings imitated under Section 187 of the Act as per the notices vide Annexures-A and D in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of."
4. Subsequent to the said order, the respondent was required to hear the petitioner and other affected parties and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law. There is no direction to demolish the construction put up by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.9511/2019. The respondent could not have passed the impugned order, without following the due process and the principles of natural justice and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
5. Hence the following:
ORDER
i) The writ petition is allowed ii) The impugned order dated
10.10.2019 bearing No.UNASA:B1:CR:45/ 2017-18 passed by the respondent vide Annexure A to the writ petition, is hereby set aside.
iii) The respondent is hereby directed to hear the petitioner and the complainant and such other persons as he deems necessary and pass appropriate orders as per the directions issued in Writ Petition No.9511/ 2019(LB-RES), as expediently as possible, within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
