Srikant M Pai vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike on 11 August, 2022

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Srikant M Pai vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike on 11 August, 2022

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                              1




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

                           BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
           WRIT PETITION NO.12815/2022 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:

SRIKANT M PAI, S/O. MOHANDAS V PAI,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT H-18, SHRIRAM SADHANA, 109,
MSR ROAD, GOKULA EXTENSION,
BANGALORE-560 054.                            ...PETITIONER

(BY SMT. SHARADHA RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
       HUDSON CIRCLE,
       BENGALURU-560 002, KARNATAKA, INDIA.
       REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER.

2.     BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE
       WARD NUMBER 16, 17, 37, 38, 42,
       2ND FLOOR, RTO COMPLEX, KAMALA NEHRU EXTENSION,
       YESWANTHPUR, BENGALURU-560 022, KARNATAKA,
       REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, ADV., FOR R1 AND R2)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENT WITH A DIRECTION FOR
IMMEDIATE PASSING OF THE DEMOLITION ORDER UNDER SECTION
321(3) OF KMC ACT AND ITS EXECUTION FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY
OF H BLOCK, SHRIRAM SADHANA APARTMENT, 109, MSR ROAD,
GOKULA EXTN, BANGALORE-560054.
                                  2




      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

The respondent-BBMP issued provisional order under section 321(1) of the Karnataka Municipalities Corporation Act calling upon the owners of the flats No. 41,42,43, 44, 45 and 48 in Srirama Sadhana Apartments, Gokula Extension, Bengaluru to show cause as to why they are proceeding with the construction and notice under Section 321(2) was issued calling upon the owners of the said flats as to why the provisional order under Section 321(1) of the Act should not be confirmed.

2. Petitioner's grievance is that though the said notices have been issued in the year 2019, the respondent No.3 has not taken any action by passing an order of confirmation under Section 321(3) of the KMC Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-BBMP submits that the notices under Section 313 of the BBMP Act, 2020 was issued to the owners of the said flats on 8.8.2020 calling upon them to produce relevant documents like sanctioned 3 building plan and building license with regard to the construction of additional floor on a common terrace. She further submits that the proceedings initiated under Section 313 of the Act shall be concluded if reasonable time is granted.

4. The submission is placed on record.

5. Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the writ petition directing respondents No.1 and 2 to conclude the proceedings initiated under Section 313 of the BBMP Act, 2020 within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE HR

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court