Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11440 WP No. 18061 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 18061 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN:
1.
T N ANAND AGED 74 YEARS S/O LATE T K NARASIMHAIAH R/O PRASHANTHNAGAR, 4TH WARD, BEHIND PATHY HOSPITAL CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANTHA NARAYANA B N., ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
THE COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, CHICKBALLAPURA - 562 101
2.
SMT ROOPA G V AGED 43 YEARS W/O MOHAN R O R/AT NO.295 OBALESHA NILAYA, BEHIND STADIUM, MARUTHI LAYOUT, KELAGINA THOTAGALU, CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN - 562 101 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT M., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI M. NARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11440 WP No. 18061 of 2024
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1, COMMISSIONER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, CHICKBALLAPURA TO INITIATE ACTION AGAINST THE R-2 IN PURSUANCE OF THE COMPLAINT LETTERS DTD. 27.05.2024 AND 24.06.2024 AS PER ANNEXURES-E AND F ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO PREVENT THE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION TAKEN UP BY THE R-2 ON THE PROPERTY KATHA NO. 207/183/A SITUATED IN THE WARD NO. 26 OF CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN BY ISSUE OF A WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT,
ORDER AND DIRECTION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for an order to direct respondent No.1 to initiate action against respondent No.2 in pursuance of the complaints at Annexures-'E' and 'F'. In terms of the said complaints at Annexures-'E' and 'F', the petitioner has represented to the Municipal Authority that respondent No.2 has been putting up construction without any building licence.
2. It appears that this Court had passed an interim
order on 31.08.2024 restraining respondent No.2 from proceeding with further construction. By virtue of such
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11440 WP No. 18061 of 2024
order, it is submitted that respondent No.2 was restrained and did not put up any further construction.
3. The statement of objections has been filed by respondent No.2 alongwith the sanction of building licence issued on 30.12.2024.
4.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 submits that application for building licence was filed on 30.06.2023 earlier to the filing of the present petition on 03.07.2024 and same had been granted by respondent No.1 on 30.12.2024.
5. Undisputedly, the respondent No.2 had put up construction even prior to obtaining of building licence. The respondent No.1 before issuing building licence ought to have ascertained construction, if any, put up by the respondent No.2.
6. There is lapse insofar as respondent No.1 has not verified the construction partially put up even prior to obtaining of building licence by respondent No.2 and had
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11440 WP No. 18061 of 2024 not taken any steps to restrain respondent No.2 to put up construction without building licence until this Court by
order dated 31.08.2024 had passed an order of restraint. To such extent, respondent No.1 has committed lapse and respondent No.2 has also put up construction though partially, which is in violation of requirement of putting up construction without the building licence.
7. In light of taking note of the peculiar facts of the case, it would be appropriate to put the respondent No.2 on terms:- (i) The respondent No.2 is to pay costs of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) to the petitioner. (ii) It is made clear that the officials of respondent No.1 are to be warned suitably to ensure that such lapse does not occur in future.
8.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that costs would be paid within a period of one
- 5 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11440 WP No. 18061 of 2024 month by way of Demand Draft by remitting the same to the account of learned counsel for the petitioner.
9. Submission is noted. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VGR