SRI. V VENKATESHAIAH @ VENKATESH v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
WP/29558/2024 · 2025-03-19
S Sunil Dutt Yadav
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33659 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33659 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11445 WP No. 29558 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. 29558 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. V. VENKATESHAIAH @ VENKATESH, S/O. LATE VENKATARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT. OLD NO.64, NEAR GOVERNMENT FAIR PRICE DEPOT, HARIHARA ROAD, VASANTHAPURA VILLAGE, SUBRAMANYAPURA POST, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 061.
2.
SRI. HEMANTH KUMAR S/O. LATE VENKATARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT OLD NO.64, NEAR GOVERNMENT FAIR PRICE DEPOT, HARIHARA ROAD, VASANTHAPURA VILLAGE, SUBRAMANYAPURA POST, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 061. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.R. ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI.
BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location:
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11445 WP No. 29558 of 2024
2.
THE TAHASILDAR, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK - 560 061.
3.
THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 062. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION ETC., BY QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 07.07.2023 ISSUED BY THE R3 BBMP, PRODUCED AT ANNX-F 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
1. The petitioners have sought for setting aside of the
order passed by the Tree Officer – BBMP in terms of the endorsement at Annexure – G.
2. It is submitted that the removal of tree sought for is in healthy condition and the application would be
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11445 WP No. 29558 of 2024 considered if the owner makes an application for removal of the tree.
3.
Learned counsel Sri H.R.Anantha Krishnamurthy appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that endorsement at Annexure – G is issued without notice to the petitioners and that the tree constitutes a danger to life and property and in terms of the order under Section 257 of the BBMP Act, 2020, if there is apprehension of danger of the tree falling, necessary action may be taken by the Authority.
4. The Section 257 of the BBMP Act, 2020 reads as follows:
"257. Precautions in case of dangerous trees.- (1) If any tree or any branch of a tree or the fruit of any tree be deemed by the Chief Commissioner to be likely to fall and thereby to endanger any person or any structure, the Chief Commissioner may by notice require the owner of the said tree to secure, lop or cut down the said tree or remove the fruit so as to prevent any danger therefrom. (2) If immediate action is necessary, the Chief Commissioner may himself before giving such notice
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:11445 WP No. 29558 of 2024 or before the period of notice expires secure, lop or cut down the said tree or remove the fruit thereof or fence off a part of any street or to take such temporary measure, as he thinks fit to prevent danger, and the cost of so doing shall be recoverable from the owner of the tree as arrears of land revenue."
5. In light of the submission that Annexure-G is passed without notice to the petitioners. Order at Annexure – G is set aside.
6. Respondent – BBMP to enquire into the matter in terms of the power conferred under Section 257 and pass appropriate order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Accordingly, petition is disposed off.
7. During the process of enquiry, the respondent-BBMP may also may issue notice to the owner as well. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22 CT: BHK