Karnataka High Court
S R Subramanyam vs Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike on 4 October, 2012
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy
1
W.P.31756/11
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF OCTOBER 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO. 31756 OF 2011 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN
S R SUBRAMANYAM
S/O S V RAMAKRISHNAN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/A NO.53/1, FIRST FLOOR,
OMSRI NILAYA, COCONUT AVENUE ROAD,
MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003
... PETITIONER
(By M/S.SREE RANGA ASSOCIATES)
AND
1. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R.SQUARE, BANGALORE-560002
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
2. SRI PALAKSHAIAH
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
GANDHINAGAR SUB DIVISION, BBMP,
DR.DCM ROYAN ROAD, BANGALORE-53
3. SRI DHARMARAJ NAIK
ASSISTANT ENGINEER, BBMP,
WARD NO.77 (OLD NO.6)
DATTATREYE TEMPLE WARD,
OPPOSITE SANGEETA APARTMENT
MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003
2
W.P.31756/11
4. SRI IDIVIN VANDAN
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER - WEST, BBMP
SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESWARAM,
BANGALORE-560003
5. SRI RANGARAJAN
CHIEF ENGINEER, BBMP
OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER-WEST,
SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESWARAM,
BANGALORE-560003
6. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
BANGALORE CITY
INFANTRY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560001
7. SMT T RAMA BAI
W/O LATE VISHWANATH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
NO.52, FIRST FLOOR,
COCONUT AVENUE ROAD,
MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003.
... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri. M N RAMANJANEYA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 - 5
SMT. GOWRAMMA, ADVOCATE FOR R2
FOR LEX PRUDENCE )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT
IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT
TO TAKE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW PURSUANT TO
THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 321 OF THE KARNATAKA
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1976 AS PER ANNEXURE-N TO
BRING THE CONSTRUCTION ON PROPERTY NO.52 (MUNICIPAL
NO.2528), COCONUT AVENUE ROAD, BEHIND 8TH CROSS,
MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003, PUT UP BY THE 7TH
RESPONDENT; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.31756/11
ORDER
In compliance with the order dt. 28.9.2012, respondents 2, 3 and 5 have filed their affidavits. The same are taken on record. Respondent No.4, it is submitted by the learned counsel, is placed under suspension in view of the tender scam. Respondent No.6, Commissioner of Police has failed to comply with the order dt. 28.9.2012. It is brought to the notice of the Court that the Engineers in-charge initiated proceeding under Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 leading to confirmation order under subsection (3) of Section 321 of the Act which the 7th respondent has called in question in Appeal No.519/11 and obtained an interim order of status-quo on 24.6.2011 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal.
2. It is needless to state that if the appeal is dismissed what will stand to be confirmed is the fact of 4 W.P.31756/11 deviation in the construction of the building by the 7th respondent. It can therefore be inferred that respondents 2 to 5 failed to prevent such unauthorised deviation in the construction of the building and hence liable for prosecution under Section 321-B of the Act.
3. Taking on record the affidavits, nothing further survives for consideration in this petition and is, accordingly disposed of. Before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, it is open for the respondent-BBMP to file an application for early hearing of the appeal and if so done, there is no reason to believe that it will not be considered and orders passed thereon.
Sd/-
JUDGE ln