Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Control Engineers vs The Commissioner on 28 October, 2024

Author: B M Shyam Prasad

Bench: B M Shyam Prasad

                                       -1-
                                                   NC: 2024:KHC:43404
                                                WP No. 13134 of 2024




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                 DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
                                  BEFORE
                 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 13134 OF 2024 (LB-BMP)


            BETWEEN:

                 M/S CONTROL ENGINEERS
                 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
                 T S PAUSKAR,
                 S/O MR S V PAUSHKAR,
                 AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
                 NO. 7TH CROSS,
                 AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI,
                 BANGALORE-560079.

                                                  ...PETITIONER
            (BY SMT. SUMANGALA A SWAMY.,ADVOCATE)
            AND:

            1.    THE COMMISSIONER
                  BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
Digitally
signed by         HEAD OFFICE, N R SQUARE,
ANAND N
                  BANGALORE-560001.
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF    2.    THE MEDICAL OFFICER (WEST)
KARNATAKA
                  GOVINDARAJNAGAR RANGE,
                  PALIKE SOUDHA, 14TH CROSS,
                  CHANDRA LAYOUT, BBMP,
                  BANGALORE-560040.

            3.    THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                  BESCOM N3 SUB DIVISION,
                  BASAVESHWARANAGAR,
                                     -2-
                                                      NC: 2024:KHC:43404
                                                  WP No. 13134 of 2024




      BANGALORE-560079.

                                                ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KARTHIKEYAN B S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND
R2)
       THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF     THE     CONSITUTION      OF        INDIA   PRAYING     TO-
a) QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 06.02.2023 BERING
NO. A a (pa) pi R 624/2022-2023 PASSED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT CANCELLING THE TRADE LICENSE OF
THE PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -G.


       THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:        HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

                          ORAL ORDER

The petitioner, who assertedly runs a Testing Unit in property No.10, 7th Cross, Agrahara, Dasarahalli, Bengaluru - 560 079, is issued with a Trade Licence on 31.03.2024 and the petitioner is aggrieved by the second respondent's Office Order dated 06.02.2023 [Annexure-G]. The second respondent by this order has cancelled the petitioner's trade licence after writing to the BESCOM -3- NC: 2024:KHC:43404 WP No. 13134 of 2024 for cancellation of the electricity essentially on the ground that he is not permitted to conduct his business in a property within the residential zone that abuts only 20 feet wide road. The second respondent has also referred to noise emissions.

The petitioner contends that he only attends to testing and repairing electrical gadgets and has availed one HP power supply and that this would be a permissible activity in a residential zone. The Impugned Order is issued without reference to the actual nature of the petitioner's business and without reference to the permitted use according to the RMP 2015 and the relevant Zonal Regulations. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the petition must succeed but with liberty to the respondents to take appropriate action after verifying the actual nature of the petitioner's business and due compliance thereof with the Zonal Regulations. Hence, the following:

-4-

NC: 2024:KHC:43404 WP No. 13134 of 2024 ORDER The petition is allowed quashing the Office Order dated 06.02.2023 [Annexure-
G] issued by the second respondent but with liberty to take action after due verification. The petitioner consequentially shall be entitled for renewal of trade licence subject to further proceedings and orders.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr