Back
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2022
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M. KHAZI
W.P. NO.1052 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. JAYANNA
S/O THOPAIAH
AGE 41 YEARS
R/O NO.272, THOPAIAH BUILDING
ANDRAHALLI MAIN ROAD
NEAR SOCIETY, VISHWANIDAM
BANGALORE NORTH
BANGALORE-560091.
2.
SRI. RAMESHA .A
S/O ANANTHAPPA
AGE 37 YEARS
R/O NO.248
THIGARAPALYA, PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES
BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE.
3.
SRI. JAYRAMA
S/O BALUNAYAK
AGE 38 YEARS
R/O NO.68, 5TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN
VIDHYAMANYA NAGAR
VISHWANIDAM
BANGALORE NORTH
BANGALORE-560031.
2
4.
SRI. B.R. SHIVAKUMAR
S/O RUDRAPPA
AGE 44 YEARS
R/O NO.26, 10TH CROSS
SRI OMKARANAGARA
BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT
NEAR VALMIKI CIRCLE
BANGALORE NORTH
YESHWANTHAPURAM
BANGALORE-560091.
5.
SRI. SAMPANGI
S/O APAIAH, AGE 49 YEARS
R/O NO.271
NEAR SALLAPURADAMMA TEMPLE
PEENYA SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES AREA
BANGALORE NORTH
BANGALORE-560058.
... PETITIONERS
(BY MR. MUKESHA K.N. ADV., FOR
MR. B.R. RAGHAVENDRA, ADV.,)
AND:
1.
THE GENERAL MANAGER
ADMIN AND HR
BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO.,
'BELAKU BHAVANA', K R CIRCLE
BENGALURU-560001.
2.
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE)
BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO.,
KENGERI O AND M DIVISION
TTMC BUILDING, KENGERI
BENGALURU-560060.
3.
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE)
BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO.,
K-2, SUB DIVISION
HEROHALLI, BENGALURU-560091.
3
4.
SRI. MADHUSUDHAN .S
S/O SHIVARAJU
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.
5.
SMT. POORNIMA .S
W/O MADHUSUDHAN .S
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS.
RESPONDENT NOS.4 & 5 ARE
R/AT NO.121, 3RD MAIN ROAD
SAMPIGE LAYOUT
BENGALURU-560079.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. H.V. DEVARAJU, ADV., FOR R1-R3)
- - -
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT
OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT TO
QUASHING THE DECISION TO SHIFT THE NO. K2 SUB-
DIVISION BESCOM FROM THE EXISTING PREMISES TO THE
PROPOSED BUILDING AS ILLEGAL, OPPOSED TO LAW AND
ARBITRARY AS SUCH THE LEASE DEED DATED 09/1/2019
ENTERED INTO BY RESPONDENT NO.2 WITH RESPONDENTS
NO.4
AND
5
VIDE
ANNEXURE-B
REQUIRED
TO
BE
QUASHED/SET ASIDE. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR
ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION DIRECTING
RESPONDENTS MORE PARTICULARLY NOS.1 TO 3 TO
CONSIDER THE GRIEVANCES ADDRESSED BY THE PUBLIC
IN TERMS OF THEIR REPRESENTATIONS AT ANNEXURE-C
AND ANNEXURE-J & ETC.
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
4
Mr.Mukesha K.N., learned counsel for the
petitioners.
Mr.H.V.Devaraju,
learned
counsel
for
the
respondent Nos.1 to 3.
This petition has been filed as a public interest
litigation in which a writ of certiorari has been sought
for quashment of the lease deed dated 09.12.2019
entered into between BESCOM and respondent Nos.4
and 5. The petitioners also seek a writ of mandamus
to consider the grievance of the public in terms of
their representations.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that he has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to
withdraw the writ petition.
3. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in 'SHEELA BARSE Vs. UNION OF INDIA',
(1988) 4 SCC 226, this public interest litigation
cannot be permitted to be withdrawn at the
instance of the petitioners. The memo for
withdrawal of the petition is, therefore, rejected.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the
BESCOM and have perused the record. The grievance
of the petitioners appears to be about shifting the
office of BESCOM from Kengeri to Andrahalli. The
decision as to where the particular office of BESCOM
has to function is a decision within the realm of the
Executive Authority and this Court, in exercise of its
powers under the writ jurisdiction, cannot interfere
with the same. Even otherwise, in the relief of
quashment of lease deed dated 09.12.2019 executed
6
between BESCOM and respondent Nos.4 and 5, there
appears to be no element of public interest.
The writ petition is only misconceived and is
therefore, dismissed.
Sd/-
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
