Karnataka High Court
N Venkataswamy Reddy vs Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike on 12 February, 2014
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N. Venugopala Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO.6573/2014 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
N. VENKATASWAMY REDDY
S/O LATE NANJA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
R/AT NO.1696, 10TH MAIN
5TH A CROSS, BSK I STAGE
SRINIVASANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560050.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI REUBEN JACOB, ADV.)
AND:
1. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA
PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE
BANGALORE - 560 027
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER
2. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TOWN
PLANNING (SOUTH)
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA
PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE
BANGALORE - 560 027.
3. JOINT COMMISSIONER (SOUTH)
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA
PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE
BANGALORE - 560 027.
2
4. B.P.SURESH KUMAR
S/O M.S.PUTTASHAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT NO.57/41
SARVARTHA SIDDHI, 40TH CROSS
8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 082.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI N.K.RAMESH, ADV. FOR R1-3
NOTICE TO R4 - D/W)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R2 AND R-3 TO EXPEDITIOUSLY COMPLETE
THE RECONSIDERATION PROCEEDINGS IN RESPECT OF
THE CANCELLATION OF MODIFIED SANCTIONED
BUILDING PLAN DATED 25.3.2013 ISSUED BY THE R-2
VIDE ANNEXURE-T AS PER THE ORDER DATED
31.10.2013 PASSED IN WP.NO.46813/2013 VIDE
ANNEXURE-Z3 AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard Sri Reuben Jacob, learned Advocate for the petitioner. Sri. N.K.Ramesh, learned Panel Advocate of BBMP, present in the Court, is directed to accept notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3, on whom copy of the writ petition was served. Issue of notice to respondent No.4 is dispensed with, keeping in view the nature of order that is proposed to be passed. With consent of 3 learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner and respondent Nos.1 to 3, matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. 4th respondent was issued with a sanction plan and building license by the BBMP for undertaking construction at site bearing No.38 (Old No.1697), situated at 6th Cross, Banashankari I Stage, II Block, Bangalore - 50. The petitioner is the neighbor of the 4th respondent. Petitioner having raised objections with regard to the construction undertaken by the 4th respondent, a modified plan having been sought by the 4th respondent, was issued by the 2nd respondent on 25.03.2013. WP.Nos.32604-605/2013 was filed by the petitioner to quash the modified sanction plan dated 25.03.2013. The said modified plan was cancelled by an order dated 28.09.2013 i.e., during the pendency of WP.Nos.32604-605/2013. The said cancellation was questioned by the 4th respondent in WP.No.46813/2013. The writ petition was allowed and 4 the cancellation order was set aside and the 2nd respondent was directed to reconsider the matter after issuing appropriate notice to the writ petitioner i.e., the 4th respondent herein. The 2nd respondent was directed to reconsider the matter by passing a reasoned order within 'one month' from the date of receipt of copy of the order. WP.Nos.32604-605/2013 was disposed of on 26.11.2013, granting liberty to the writ petitioner to file objection before respondent No.2, in the matter of granting modified building plan in respect of the property bearing site No.38 (Old No.1697) situated at 6th Cross, Banashankari I Stage, II Block, Bangalore - 50. Respondent No.2 was directed to consider the objections filed, if any, in accordance with law.
3. The petitioner has filed objections vide Annexure - Z5 on 21.12.2013. The 2nd respondent has issued notices vide Annexures - Z6 and Z7. The petitioner has submitted further representations. Finding that the 2nd respondent is not taking decision in 5 the matter i.e., in terms of the order passed in WP.No.46813/2013 dated 31.10.2013, this writ petition was filed to direct the 2nd respondent to expeditiously complete the reconsideration proceeding in respect of the modified sanction plan bearing LP No.1388/2011- 12 dated 25.03.2013.
4. Perused the writ record.
5. Sanction plan was issued to the 4th respondent on 07.12.2012. A modified plan was issued by the 2nd respondent to the 4th respondent on 25.03.2013. The petitioner having filed WP.Nos.32604- 605/2013, the modified plan was cancelled on 28.09.2013. Order of cancellation, when questioned in WP.No.46813/2013, on the ground that there is violation of principles of natural justice, in that, the 4th respondent herein was not heard prior to the passing of order dated 28.09.2013, by an order dated 31.10.2013, WP.No.46813/2013 was allowed and the matter was remitted to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration after 6 issue of appropriate notice and in accordance with law. A time limit of one month was specified for compliance. The period fixed in the said order has expired long ago. The 2nd respondent ought to have decided the matter by now. Despite the petitioner having approached the 2nd respondent with representations, there is non- compliance with the direction issued in the said order, which amounts to disobedience and contempt proceeding can be initiated. Be that as it may.
This petition is disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent to complete the process as directed in the order dated 31.10.2013 in WP.No.46813/2013 expeditiously and before 15.03.2014. The petitioner shall render co-operation by appearing before the 2nd respondent on all the hearing dates. If necessary, the 2nd respondent shall prepone the case and refix the hearing date by serving an intimation on the 4th respondent herein. The petitioner shall place on record 7 of the 2nd respondent a copy of this order on or before 15.02.2014.
Needless to observe that the time specified herein, for compliance, if not adhered to by the 2nd respondent, this Court may have to initiate suo-moto contempt proceeding against him.
Sd/-
JUDGE ca