Karnataka High Court
Sri. M Ananda Bhiravi vs State Of Karnataka on 5 September, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:37338
WP No. 20398 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO. 20398 OF 2024 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
SRI. M ANANDA BHIRAVI
S/O. LATE SRI MADAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1002, 14TH MAIN, 16TH CROSS,
FIRST STAGE, 5TH BLOCK, HBR LAYOUT,
NEAR SRI SAI HOSPITAL, NAGAWARA POST,
BANGALORE-560 045.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HARIPRASAD M B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
signed by R M.S. BUILDING, VIDHANA VEEDHI,
DEEPA BENGALURU 560 001
Location: REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU BRUHAT MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
HEAD OFFICE, HUDSON CIRCLE,
BENGALURU-560 001
3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, EAST,
BENGALURU BRUHAT MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSE BUILDING,
M.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:37338
WP No. 20398 of 2024
4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BENGALURU BRUHAT MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
H.B.R. LAYOUT, BENGALURU 560 043
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R1
SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE , ADVOCATE FOR R2-R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATION DTD. 07.06.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER VIDE ANNX-G AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO
ACT IN ACCORDANCE TO THE SUBMISSION MADE UNDER THE
SAID REPRESENTATION DTD. 07.06.2024 VIDE ANNX-G
CONDUCT PROPER ENQUIRY SPOT INSPECTION, AS TO
SECURE THE SETBACK AREA AND THEREBY PREVENT ANY
FURTHER CONSTRUCTION THAT SHALL ENCROACH THE SAID
SETBACK AREA AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or in the like nature of directions, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 07.06.2024, submitted by the petitioner, vide Annexure-G;-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:37338 WP No. 20398 of 2024
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or in the like nature of direction, directing the respondents to act in accordance to the submission made under the said representation dated 07.06.2024, vide Annexure-G, conduct proper enquiry, spot inspection, as to secure the setback area and thereby prevent any further construction that shall encroach the said setback area;
(iii) Issue a writ or mandamus or in the like nature of direction, directing the Trial Court to halt and stay the further construction work thereon, as specified in the said representation dated 07.06.2024, vide Annexure-G."
2. It is the case of the petitioner that, the petitioner is a senior citizen and retired government servant. It is contended that, the petitioner had invested all his hard earned savings and purchased the site from BDA. It is contended that previous residential premises which stood adjacent to the house property of the petitioner was demolished, that at the said juncture certain damages had occurred to his property. The petitioner complained the same and he was refrained from -4- NC: 2024:KHC:37338 WP No. 20398 of 2024 doing so. After demolition, the construction work had commenced without leaving the setback area thereof, which is against the norms. It is contended that if the construction is continued and completed then the same would severely affect the foundation of his property. The petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent authorities, but the respondent authorities neither considered the representation nor passed any order on the said representation. Hence, this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the respondents, but the respondents have not considered the same. Hence, filed this writ petition.
5. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC:37338 WP No. 20398 of 2024
6. On perusal of the entire petition, the petitioner has nowhere stated that who is the person undertaking construction adjacent to the property of the petitioner. Even from the perusal of the representation vide Annexure-G, the petitioner has not mentioned the name of the person, who is undertaking the construction adjacent to the property of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has a doubt about the owner of the adjacent site. In the absence of specific allegation against the particular person, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. Accordingly, I do not find any grounds to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The writ petition is dismissed.
Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation to the respondent, disclosing the name of the owner, who is undertaking alleged illegal construction, -6- NC: 2024:KHC:37338 WP No. 20398 of 2024 if such representation is made, the respondent is directed to consider the same in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB