Karnataka High Court
H R Jairaj Gupta S/O Sri H ... vs The Assistant Revenue Officer on 18 June, 2018
Author: B.Veerappa
Bench: B. Veerappa
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
WRIT PETITION Nos. 46395-46397 of 2012 (LB-BMP)
Between:
1. H.R. Jairaj Gupta
S/o Sri. H. Ramchandrasetty,
Aged about 64 years,
2. H.R. Vanamala
D/o Sri. H. Ramchandrasetty,
Aged about 56 years,
Both residing at No.226,
8th 'C' Main, 1st Block,
H.R.B.R. Layout,
Kalyan Nagar,
Bengaluru - 560 043. ... Petitioners
(By Sri. Ajith Kumar A.S, Adv. for
Sri. C.G. Gopalaswamy, Adv.)
And:
1. The Assistant Revenue Officer
Gandhinagar Sub Division,
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike,
Cottonpet,
Bengaluru - 560 053.
2
2. The Joint Commissioner
West Zone,
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike,
Malleswaram,
Bengaluru - 560 003.
3. H.V. Vijaya Ranga
S/o Sri. H.R. Venugopal,
Aged about 33 years,
Residing at No.400A,
3rd Phase, Manjunathnagar,
Bengaluru - 560 010.
4. Smt. T. Gayathri
W/o Sri. M. Venkatesh,
Aged about 42 years,
No.26, 2nd Cross,
Babuji Extension,
Chandralayout,
Bengaluru - 560 040. ... Respondents
(By Sri. S.N. Prashanth Chandra, Adv. for R-1 & R-2;
Sri. P.N. Hegde, Adv. for R-4
Service of notice on R-3 is held sufficient.)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, praying to quash the
impugned order dated 26.06.2012 in RP No.21/11-12
passed by respondent No.2 under Annexure-S and etc.,
These Petitions coming on for Preliminary hearing
in 'B' Group, this day, the Court made the following :
3
ORDER
The petitioners filed the present writ petitions for writ of certiorari to quash a) the impugned order dated June 26, 2012 in RP No.21/2011-2012 passed by the 2nd respondent as per Annexure - S, b) katha vide certificate bearing NO.DA(GA)Ward -77-KTR/98/2011- 2012 dated 15.10.2011 in the name of the 3rd respondent as per Annexure - M in respect of the schedule site and c) katha vide certificate bearing No. DA(GA)Ward-77-KTR/182/2012-2013 dated 26.07.2012 in the name of the 4th respondent as per Annexure - T, in respect of the schedule site.
2. Sri.S.N.Prashanth Chandra, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri.P.N.Hegde learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 pointed out that the petitioners have already filed comprehensive suit for declaration seeking similar reliefs as sought in the plaint on 09.04.2012. 4 Subsequently, the present writ petitions came to be filed on 16.11.2012 for similar reliefs and the petitioners cannot maintain the writ petitions and they cannot be permitted to pursue parallel remedies simultaneously both before the Civil Court as well as before this Court. Therefore, sought to dismiss the writ petitions.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, Sri.Ajith Kumar A.S. learned counsel for the petitioners has not disputed the fact that the petitioners have already filed suit in O.S.No.2603/2012 seeking similar reliefs. If it is so, the petitioners cannot maintain the present writ petitions for similar reliefs before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In view of the above, writ petitions filed by the petitioners for the relief sought for are not maintainable. Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court 5 to establish their rights in the suit O.S.No.2603/2012 pending between the parties on the file of Additional City Civil Court, Bengaluru and it is needless to observe that all the parties to the suit are bound by the decree to be passed and ultimately the BBMP would act in accordance with law as per the decree passed by the Civil Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE UN