Karnataka High Court
Samarpana (Cultural And Social vs State Of Karnataka on 27 September, 2019
Bench: Chief Justice, S R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.30521 OF 2019 (GM-RES) PIL
BETWEEN:
SAMARPANA (CULTURAL & SOCIAL
SERVICE ORGANISATION)
NO.7-B, 19TH 'C' MAIN ROAD
1ST BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 010
REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL SECRETARY
SRI.SHIVAKUMAR HOSAMANI
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O LATE SRI NAGANNA
... PETITIONER
(BY SHRI G.R.MOHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560 001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU URBAN
KHANDAYA BHAVAN
K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009
3. THE TAHASILDAR
BENGALURU NORTH
KHANDAYA BHAVAN
K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009
-2-
4. THE COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R.SQUARE
BENGALURU - 560 001
5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
STORM WATER DRAIN
BRUHATH BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
BENGALURU - 560 001
6. SRI L.T.KARLE, MAJOR
S/O LATE LAKSHMI GOWDA
R/AT NO.261, 4TH MAIN
MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 086
7. SMT.SAROJINI KARLE, MAJOR
WIFE OF SRI L.T.KARLE
RESIDING AT NO.261, 4TH MAIN
MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 086
8. SRI MAHENDRA KARLE, MAJOR
SON OF L.T.KARLE
R ESIDING AT NO.261, 4TH MAIN
MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 086
... RESPONDENTS
(SHRI B.V.KRISHNA, AGA FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3
SHRI AMIT DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 5
SHRI.UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SHRI.VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING
APPLICANT IN I.A.NO.2/2019)
---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING TO THE RESPONDENT
NOS.1 TO 5 TO REMOVE ALL THE ENCROACHMENTS OVER
THE STORM WATER DRAIN PASSING THROUGH THE
NAGAWARA VILLAGE IN SURVEY NOS.72, 92, 93, 94 AND 95
BENGALURU NORTH ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
ORDER
There is an application for impleadment, being I.A.No.2/2019 and an application for vacating the interim relief, being I.A.No.3/2019 filed by a third party applicant.
2. Our attention is invited to paragraph 9 of the order dated 17th September 2019 passed in W.P.No.38401/2014 and other connected matters including W.P.No.30521/2019. The said part of the order will have to be understood in the context of the order dated 18th June 2019 and in particular, what is observed in the first paragraph of the said order and the directions contained in clauses (xii) and (xiii) of paragraph 33. The said order makes it clear that the issue regarding illegal constructions and encroachments made on the storm water drains will be gone into in W.P.No.38401/2014, which is pending for final disposal.
3. The allegation in W.P.No.30521/2019 is as regards the alleged encroachments over the storm water drain described in prayer clause (A). As far as this prayer is concerned, the same will be governed by the directions contained in the order dated 18th June 2019. As directed in clause (xii) of paragraph 33, survey of even the alleged storm water drain subject matter of W.P.No.30521/2019 will have to be carried out. If any -4- encroachment is found, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for short 'BBMP') is bound to take action as directed in clause (viii).
4. The directions issued under the order dated 18th June 2019 are applicable to all the storm water drains within the jurisdiction of the BBMP and that is why a direction is issued to carry out a survey of 250 survey numbers every month as per the schedule provided by the BBMP.
5. The impleading applicant contends that the storm water drain as alleged in W.P.No.30521/2019 is not in existence. It is not necessary for us to go into that issue as it is the duty of the State Government to carry out a survey of all the storm water drains. As in W.P.No.30521/2019, it is contended that there exists a storm water drain on the property more particularly described in prayer clause (A), a survey will have to be carried out by the Government of the said property as well. In the survey, which may be carried out, true and correct position about the existence of the storm water drain will come on record.
6. Therefore, as far as the prayer clause (A) is concerned, we need not entertain the petition as the same is taken care of by the order dated 18th June 2019 in W.P.No.38401/2014. -5-
7. As far as the prayer clause (B) is concerned, it is for the petitioner to set criminal law into motion by taking recourse to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Therefore, it is not necessary to grant prayer clause (B). However, we make it clear that we have made no adjudication on the factual questions raised in the writ petition.
8. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of subject to the observations made above.
9. The pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and stand disposed of.
10. In view of what is observed in this order, paragraph 9 of the order dated 17th June 2019 stands clarified.
11. All contentions of the parties remain open.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE AHB