1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION No.52658/2019 ( LB-RES)

Between:

Sri Syed Sikandar,

S/o Syed Sami,

Aged about 28 years,

Chicken Merchant,

R/at No.2409, 20^th Division,

Dargha Mohalla,

Doddaballapur Town – 561 203,

Bangalore Rural District.

… Petitioner

(By Sri S.A. Khadri, Advocate)

And:

1.

The State of Karnataka,

By its Secretary to Government,

Urban Development Department,

M.S. Building,

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Road,

Bangalore – 560 001.

2.

The Housing and Urban Development

Authority,

Vikasa Soudha,

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Road,

Bangalore – 560 001,

Represented by its

Under Secretary to the Government.

2

3.

The City Municipal Council,

Doddaballapur – 561 203,

Bangalore Rural District,

Represented by its Commissioner.

… Respondents

(By Smt. Prathima Honnapura, AGA for R1 & R2)

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227

of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated

7.1.2019 passed by the R-3 at Annexure-Z and also order

dated 13.11.2019 passed by R-3 at Annexure-AA directing

the jurisdictional police to provide police protection for

demolition of building situated at schedule property and etc.

This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing

this day, the Court, made the following:

ORDER

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No.1

and 2.

The petitioner has challenged the order passed by

the respondent Municipal Authority dated 07.01.2019

which is passed under Section 187(9) (ii) (c) and (d) of

Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred

to as ‘Act’ for the sake of brevity). It is noticed that as

against the said order, petitioner has a remedy of appeal

available under Section 343 (1) (ii) of the Act.

3

2.

In light of the availability of the alternate

remedy as against the impugned order at Annexure –Z

petition is dismissed as not requiring any order for

adjudication. Petitioner reserves liberty to challenge

Annexure-Z as envisaged under Section 343(1) (ii) of the

Act.

3.

In light of the submission of the learned

counsel for the petitioner, taking note that petition was

pending before this Court, the impugned order at

Annexure –Z and consequential orders are kept in

abeyance for a period of four weeks from today.

4.

If petitioner were to file appeal proceedings

as envisaged within two weeks, request for interim

prayer to be considered as per law expeditiously.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BVK