Karnataka High Court
Mallikarjun S/O Shivappa Pattanshetty vs The Deputy Commissioner & Ors on 1 August, 2013
Author: Mohan M Shantanagoudar
Bench: Mohan .M. Shantanagoudar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
ST
DATED THIS THE 1 DAY OF AUGUST, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN .M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO.87024/2012 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
Malikarjun
S/o Shivappa Patanshetty
Age: 42 years, Occ: Member of
Town Municipality Talikooti,
R/o Mudebhihal,
Dist: Bijapur-586101.
...Petitioner
(By Sri Harshavardhan.R.Malipatil, Advocate)
AND:
1. The Deputy Commissioner,
Bijapur-586101.
2. The Chief Officer,
Town Municipal Council,
Talikoti, Tq: Muddebihal,
Dist: Bijapur-586101.
3. Tikmaram Bhoraj Chowdri,
2
C/o Shop No.21, Opp: Bus Stand,
Town Municipality,
Commercial Complex,
Talikoti, Tq: Muddebihal,
Dist: Bijapur-586101.
... Respondents
(Sri. Shivanand Patil, Advocate for R3
Sri Manvendra Reddy, GA for R1
R2 - served )
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of
mandamus directing respondent No.1 to pass necessary
orders in resolution of Talikoti TMC dated 5.7.2012
bearing No.17/1 decision No.334 and consequently
terminate the lease entered in favour of respondent No.3
by respondent No.2 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary
hearing in 'B' Group this day, the Court made the
following:
ORDER
The grievance of the petitioner is that the petition filed by him and others as per Annexure-'B' dated 31.12.2011 under Section 306 (1) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 is not considered by the Deputy Commissioner at an early date. 3
2. The petitioner and some others seem to have been aggrieved by the action of the respondents in allotting a shop in favour of third respondent and in that regard a petition came to be filed by the petitioner and others as per Annexure-'B' dated 31.12.2011 to initiate action as per Section 306 (1) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act. Sri. Shivanand Patil as well as Sri. Harshavardhan R. Malipatil, learned Advocates submit that the Deputy Commissioner has issued notice to the concerned. However, no further action is taken.
May be, the Deputy Commissioner is considering the request of the petitioner as per law. Be that as it may, such consideration shall be made within a reasonable period. Since the petition is filed on 31.12.2011, the interest of justice will be met if the Deputy Commissioner is directed to consider the 4 petition filed by the petitioner as per law within a span of four months from the date of receipt of this order.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE swk