Smt. Yaramma vs State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 4740 Kant

                          1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH,2022

                      BEFORE

   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

   WRIT PETITION NO.5539 OF 2022(LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:

SMT. YARAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS,
WIFE OF NARAYANA REDDY,
RESIDING AT NO.81/4A,
BGS MEENAKSHI MALL,
HULIMAVU, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
                                         ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V B SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   VIDHANA SOUDHA,
   DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
   BENGALURU - 560 001.
   BY ITS SECRETARY.

2. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
   CORPORATION OFFICE, J C ROAD,
   N R SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

3. THE POLICE INSPECTOR,
   HULIMAVU POLICE STATION,
   HULIMAVU,
   BENGALURU - 560 076.

4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
   AREKERE SUB DIVISION,
   BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
   BENGALURU - 573 134.
                                       ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NITHYANANDA K R, AGA FOR R1 & R3;
    SMT. SUMANGALA GACHCHINAMATH, ADV.,FOR R2 & R4)
                            2



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS DATED 11.02.2022
ISSUED BY R-4 VIDE ANNX-A AND ORDER DIRECTING THE
POLICE AND THE ORDER AUTHORITIES TO CONSEQUENTLY
DIRECT THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE AND
THE STATE GOVT TO RESTORE THE PROPERTY OF THE
PETITIONER AND TO HAND OVER THE PROPERTY OF THE
PETITIONER   WHICH   IS   PUT   TO  USE   ILLEGALLY,
UNLAWFULLY, ARBITRARILY AND USING THE STATUTORY
PROVISIONS FOR ILLEGAL PURPOSES OF A PRIVATE PARTY
AND ETC.,

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY THROUGH PHYSICAL
HEARING, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                        ORDER

The short grievance of the petitioner is as to

alleged encroachment of her land by the respondent-

Corporation. Learned counsel for the petitioner points

out that there is already a status - quo order granted by

a Coordinate Bench of this Court in pending RFA

No.1802/2012 concerning the very same property.

2. Learned Panel Counsel appearing for the

respondent - Corporation having opposed the writ

petition for some time, now fairly submits that the

officials of the Corporation will not barge into subject

property of the petitioner in view of the interim order

granted by the Coordinate Bench as mentioned above.

Learned AGA appearing for Respondents Nos. 1 & 3

submits that police went to the spot in question on the

request of the Corporation officials so that no law & order

problem would arise and that police as such do not have

any interest in the subject matter of the dispute.

In view of the above, this writ petition need not be

retained on the file any longer since there is an

assurance from the side of Corporation as to maintaining

the status quo in terms of the interim order granted by

the Coordinate Bench in the pending RFA. It is open to

the respondent-Corporation to seek its impleadment in

the said RFA if there is a case for that.

With the above observations, this writ petition is

disposed off, making it clear that this judgment is

confined to the properties described in the schedule to

the petition.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Bsv