Karnataka High Court
Mrs Ameena Tojari vs The Commissioner on 10 June, 2022
Bench: S.G.Pandit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
WRIT PETITION No.16582/2015(LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
MRS AMEENA TOJARI
W/O AHMED TOJARI
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT HOUSE NO.2/2
PETTIGREW STREET
SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS
BANGALORE-560 001
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANDESH P. NADIGER FOR
SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER
CORPORATION OF CITY OF BANGALORE
BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
J C ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
SHIVAJINAGARA SUB DIVISION
BBMP,BANGALORE
3. BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY SEWEAGE BOARD
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
KAVERI BHAVAN BUILDING
BANGALORE-560 009
4. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY CO. LTD.
BANGALORE
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
K R CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560 001
2
5. THE INSPECTORATE OF LIFTS
MYSUGAR COMPANY BUILDING
J C ROAD,BANGALORE-560 002
6. THE INSPECTOR OF GENERAL
STAMP & REGISTRATION IN
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
KAVERI BHAVAN BUILDING
K G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001
7. MRS NASEEMA BEGUM
D/O LATE C. ABDUL RAHAMAN
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT NO.3/5,PETTIGREW STREET
SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS
BHARATHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 001
8. MR MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KHURESHI
S/O LATE C. ABDUL RAHAMAN
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT NO.3/5, PETTIGREW STREET
SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS
BHARATHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 001
9. MR C MURTHUJA KHURESHI
S/O LATE C. ABDUL RAHAMAN
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT NO.3/5,PETTIGREW STREET
SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS
BHARATHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 001
10 . MRS HASINA BEGUM
W/O KASHIM SAHIB SURESI
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT HOUSE NO.3
PETTIGREW STREET
SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS
BHARATHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 001
11 . MRS ZARINA BANU
W/O MOHAMMED
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/AT HOUSE NO.3/2
PETTIGREW STREET
3
SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS
BHARATHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 001
RESPONDENTS No.7 TO 11 ARE
REP BY THEIR P.A. HOLDER
SRI SYED RASHEED MOSHSIN
PROP.OF M/S UNITED CREATIONS
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT NO.114,4TH MAIN
KEB LAYOUT,BTM LAYOUT
BENGALURU-560 029
12 . M/ S UNITED CREATIONS
A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN
HAVING ITS OFFICE:NO.114
4TH MAIN,KEB LAYOUT
BTM 1ST STAGE
BANGALORE-560 029
REP. BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR
MR SYED RASHID MOHSIN
S/O MR S A SALAAM
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
...RESPONDENTS
(BY KUM. NANDINI SUNIL FOR SRI. K.N. PUTTEGOWDA
FOR R1 AND R2,
SRI K.B. MONESH KUMAR FOR R3,
SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR FOR R4,
SRI M. VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R6,
R7, R8, R9, R10, R11 & R12 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 &
2 TO ENFORCE THE CONFIMATION ORDER DTD.8.10.2013 IN
RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING NO.3/3, PETTIGREW
STREET, SEPPINGS ROAD CROSS, BANGALORE-560 001 AND
CONSEQUENTLY DEMOLISH THE UNAUTHORIZED
CONSTRUCTION AS DESCRIBED IN ANNEX-E AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
4
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court under Article
226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of
mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to
enforce the Confirmation Order (Annexure-E)
bearing No.Saa.Kaa.Nee.Aha(She.Ne)/CO/26/13-14,
(Annexure-H) bearing No.Saa.Kaa.Nee.Aha
(She.Ne)/CO/26/13-14 both dated 08.10.2013 in
respect of property bearing No.3/3, Pettigrew Street,
Seppings Road Cross, Bangalore - 560 001, and
consequently to demolish the unauthorized
construction.
2. Heard Sri Sandesh P. Nadiger, learned counsel for
Sri G. Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Kum. Nandini Sunil, learned counsel for
Sri K.N. Puttegowda, learned Standing Counsel for
respondents 1 and 2, Sri K.B. Monesh Kumar, learned
counsel for the 3rd respondent as well as Sri M. Vinod
Kumar, learned AGA for the 6th respondent. Perused
the writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that the petitioner is the owner of property bearing
No.2/2, Pettigrew Street, Seppings Road Cross, Bharati
Nagar, Bangalore-560 001, having purchased the same
under registered Sale Deed in the year 2005. The
respondents 7 to 11 are the owners of properties
bearing Nos.3/1 and 3/2 to 3/5, Pettigrew Street,
Sippings Road Cross, Bharathi Nagar, Bangalore-
560 001. Petitioner is the neighbour of respondents 7
to 11. Respondents 7 to 11 entered into Joint
Development Agreement with respondent No.12 for
putting up construction in their properties bearing Nos.
3/1 and 3/2 to 3/5 adjacent to the property of the
petitioner. The respondents 7 to 12 proceeded
construction in the said properties without leaving any
set back, which is in total violation of the approved
construction plan. Petitioner is said to have complained
to respondents 1 and 2-Bruhath Bengaluru
Mahanagara Palike (for short 'the BBMP'). The
respondents 1 and 2 initiated proceedings under
Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations
Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act'). Respondents 1 and 2
passed provisional order under Section 321(1) of the Act
on 01.10.2013 and the confirmation order was passed
on 08.10.2013. Respondents 7 to 9 filed appeal
No.1043 to 1045/2013 before the Karnataka Appellate
Tribunal at Bangalore. The Karnataka Appellate
Tribunal by its order dated 14.01.2015 rejected the
appeals filed by respondents 7 to 9 and confirmed the
confirmation order passed by the 2nd respondent under
Section 321(3) of the Act.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that even after dismissal of the appeals filed by
respondents 7 to 9, respondents 1 and 2 have failed to
take action pursuant to the confirmation order dated
08.10.2013.
5. Inspite of petitioner making several
representations Annexure-N dated 25.09.2014 to the 2nd
respondent- Assistant Executive Engineer, Annexure-Q
dated 21.01.2015 to the 2nd respondent as well as
Annexure-Q1 dated 21.01.2015 to the Executive
Engineer as well as Annexure-Q2 dated 21.01.2015 to
the Chief Engineer (East) BBMP, Annexure-Q3
representation to the Additional Commissioner (East)
BBMP, as well as dismissal of appeals filed by
respondents 7 to 9, confirming the confirmation order
passed by 2nd respondent, the respondent-BBMP has
not taken any action to implement the confirmation
order dated 08.10.2013. Therefore, the aggrieved
petitioner is before this Court praying for a writ of
mandamus.
6. Sri K.N. Puttegowda, learned Standing Counsel for
the respondent-BBMP appears through video conference
and submits that the representations of the petitioner
would be considered and appropriate action would be
taken to implement the confirmation order.
7. Respondents 1 and 2 initiated action in terms of
Annexures-C, D and F, all dated 1.10.2013, which
indicates passing of provisional order under Section
321(1), Section 321(2) and 321(1) of the Act, respectively
in respect of the construction put up by respondents 7
to 12 on the properties bearing Nos.3/3, 3/3 and 3/4
respectively, of Pettigrew Street, Seppings Road Cross,
Bangalore. Thereafter Annexures-E, H and L all dated
08.10.2013 indicates passing of confirmation order
under Section 321(3) of Act in respect of the properties
bearing Nos.3/3, 3/4 and 3/5.
8. Against the confirmation order respondents 7 to 9
preferred appeal Nos.1043 to 1045/2013 before the
Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal by its
judgment dated 14.01.2015 confirmed the order of
confirmation and dismissed the appeals.
9. Thereafter, petitioner has made representations
Annexures-Q, Q1 and Q3 all dated 21.01.2015 to the
2nd respondent as well as to the Executive Engineer and
Chief Engineer of BBMP respectively, but those
representations are pending consideration and no
orders are passed nor action is initiated to implement
the confirmation order. The respondent-BBMP has
legal obligation to implement its own order passed
under Section 321 of the Act. In the instant case, the
respondent-BBMP has come to the conclusion that
construction put up by respondents 7 to 12 is in
contravention of the sanctioned plan. Therefore, the
respondent-BBMP is duty bound to implement the order
passed under Section 321(3) of the Act. The
respondent-BBMP cannot sleep over its own order for
years together.
10. Wherefore the respondent-BBMP is directed to
consider the representation Annexure-N dated
25.09.2014 as well as Annexures-Q, Q1 and Q3 all
dated 21.01.2015 and take appropriate action to
implement the confirmation order passed under Section
321(3) of the Act under Annexure-E bearing
No.SaKaNiAa(Shi.Na)/C.O/26/2013-14, Annexure-H
bearing No.SaKaNiAa(Shi.Na)/C.O/25/2013-14 and
Annexure-L bearing No.SaKaNiAa(Shi.Na)/C.O/27
/2013-14 all dated 08.10.2013, within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above observation the writ petition
stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NG*
CT:NR
