Karnataka High Court
Sri V Narayanswamy vs Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike on 26 July, 2017
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF JULY 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
WRIT PETITION No.193/2014 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
SRI. V. NARAYANSWAMY
S/O LATE VENKATASWAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS
R/AT. No.35/14, 3RD MAIN ROAD
38TH A CROSS, 8TH BLOCK
BANGALORE-560 082.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V.V. GUNJAL, ADV.,)
AND:
1. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 002
REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
2. BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE
OFFICE OF THE BRUHAT BANGALORE
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
RANI CHENNAMMA CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560002
REP BY ITS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLCIE.
3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
BASAVANAGUDI SUB-DIVISION
BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560004.
4. SRI. M.S. SHANTHAPPA
S/O LATE SINGRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS (SINCE DECEASED)
R/AT. No.45/1, RESERVOIR STREET
Date of Order 26-07-2017 W.P.No.193/2014
Sri. V. Narayanswamy Vs.
Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike & Ors.
2/5
BASAVANAGUDI
BANGALORE-560 004.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.V. MURALIDHAR, ADV., FOR R1 & R3
SRI. A.K. VASANTH, AGA FOR R2)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING LICENSE
L.P.No.SUT/0432/12-13 DATED 17/7/2012 AT ANNEXURE - G
ISSUED BY THE 1ST AND 3RD RESPONDENTS WHICH IS PER SE
ILLEGAL AND CONTRARY TO THE BUILDING BYE-LAWS OF THE
BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGRA PALIKE 2003 (KARNATAKA
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT 1976) AND THE SAME HAVING
BEEN SECURED WITHOUT DISCLOSING THE EXISTENCE OF
THE COMMON PASSAGE TOWARDS THE EASTERN SIDE OF
THE PLOT & ETC.,
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Mr. V.V. Gunjal, Adv. for Petitioner Mr. B.V. Muralidhar, Adv. for R1 & R3 Mr. A.K. Vasanth, AGA for R2
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-Mr.V.Narayanaswamy with the following prayers:-
"(i) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing license L.P.No.SUT/0432/12-13 dated Date of Order 26-07-2017 W.P.No.193/2014 Sri. V. Narayanswamy Vs. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike & Ors.3/5
17/7/2012 at Annexure-G issued by the 1st and 3rd Respondents which is per se illegal and contrary to the Building Bye-Laws of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike 2003 (Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act 1976) and the same having been secured without disclosing the existence of the common passage towards the eastern side of the Plot pr;
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents 1, 2 and 3 to discharge their statutory duty and initiate action in accordance with law and demolish the illegal structure put up based on the illegal plan L.P.No.SUT/0432/12-13 dated 17/7/2012 at Annexure-G obtained by the 4th Respondent suppressing the common passage and showing wrong measurements;
(iii) Grant such other direction, relief/s, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case in the interest of justice and equity".
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that against the site measuring 30 x 28ft only belonging to Respondent No.4-Mr.M.S.Shanthappa, the respondent-BBMP has sanctioned a plan in his favour Date of Order 26-07-2017 W.P.No.193/2014 Sri. V. Narayanswamy Vs. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike & Ors. 4/5 for a site measuring 30 x 32ft, which is apparently more than the measurement of the site belonging to the said Respondent No.4 and therefore, a suitable direction deserves to be given to the Respondent-BBMP.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent-BBMP has submitted that there is a civil dispute of boundary and title for which, a civil suit filed by the present petitioner was decreed by the trial Court, against which, R.F.A. No.1400/2012 (V.Narayanaswamy vs. Smt.A.Vaishali & others including Respondent No.4-Mr.M.S.Shanthappa) is pending in this Court and till the said civil suit is finally decided, the Respondent-BBMP cannot take any action in this regard.
4. Having heard the learned Counsels, this Court is satisfied that there is no merit in the present petition and since the civil dispute is yet to be decided in the aforesaid R.F.A.No.1400/2012, the Respondent-BBMP Date of Order 26-07-2017 W.P.No.193/2014 Sri. V. Narayanswamy Vs. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike & Ors. 5/5 is bound to await the decision in the matter and therefore, no such mandamus direction as prayed in this petition can be given.
5. The petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Srl.