Dr T K M Dass vs The Commissioner
2022 Latest Caselaw 3148 Kant

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

   WRIT PETITION NO.22729 OF 2021 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

DR T K M DASS
S/O SRI P K MAHENDRA DASS
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.7, 3RD CROSS,
3RD MAIN ROAD, HOYSALANAGAR
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR EXTN.,
BANGALORE - 560016.                  ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI PRAJITH C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
HEAD OFFICE, N R SQUARE
BANGALORE - 560 002.

2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BBMP - HORAMAVU SUB-DIVISION
MAHADEVAPURA ZONE
HORAMAVU MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 113.

3. SRI AKBAR THANAKALACHERUVU
S/O SRI MASTAHAN THANAKALACHERUVU
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

4. SMT HASEENA DUDEKULA
W/O SRI AKBAR THANAKALAVHERUVU
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
                              2




5. SRI MASTHAN THANAKALACHERUVU
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 ARE R/O
C/O SRI MASTHAN THANAKALACHERUVU
SITE NO.16, 4TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN ROAD
HOYSALANAGAR, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR EXTN.,
BANGLAORE - 560016.                  ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI CHANDAN SANJAY BHAT, ADV. FOR
SRI AMIT DESHPANDE FOR R.1 & 2)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IN DIA PRAYING TO
COMPELL R.1 AND 2 TO TAKE TIME BOUND ACTION
AGAINST THE ILLEGAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION IN THE
SCHEDULE - B PREMISES BY R-3 TO 5 AS REQUIRED
UNDER THE KMC ACT THE BUILDING BYE-LAWS AND THE
JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND THE HON'BLE
SUPREME COURT.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

Petitioner who is the adjoining owner submitted

representations to the respondent/Bruhat Bengaluru

Mahanagara Palike so as to take action against respondents

3 to 5 for putting up illegal construction without obtaining

sanctioned plan from the respondent/Bruhat Bengaluru

Mahanagara Palike.

2. Petitioner's grievance is that the said

representations are not considered by the respdt/Bruhat

Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike .

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respdt/Bruhat

Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike submits that after verifying

as to whether the sanctioned plan is issued in favour of

respondents 3 to 5 or not, the respdt/Bruhat Bengaluru

Mahanagara Palike shall take appropriate steps in

accordance with law, if reasonable time is granted.

4. The submission is placed on record.

5. Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the petition

directing 2nd respondent to consider the representations

dated 12.08.2020 and 18.12.2020 submitted by the

petitioner vide Annexures 'H' and "X' respectively to this

writ petition and pass appropriate order in accordance with

law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of

the certified copy of this order.

Sd/-

JUDGE brn