3 THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER A " ' SOUTH MARKET, BANGALoR,rs'MAuANAGARA'«M PALIKE, JAYANAGAR SHOPPEHG (EOLVIPLEX. " " JAYANAGAR, BANGALoRE~56opa3_ ' * e (By M/S : ASHOK HARANAHALi, 1 'A!f's&. 1 1%: To R3) THIS WRIT PETI'l'I'O__N"«.IS FILED" UMJER ARTICLES 225 ANB 227 01:' THE C0NSIi'TUTiQ,Ef:=OF*INDI1%VPRAYING T0 QUASH THE ORDER m,3;a,2oo7i FA~SSEi)"BY THE R2, VIDE ANN-L ANDETC. " % " THIS PE'r1Tfér;, "(i(;§11lNG are ;m PRLHEARING IN 'B' GRCEJP-,f_' THIS my' coUm* MADE THE FoLLow1mT§k%kL% . The; petitioner, a 'Ii¢ex1cee of a shop premises in belonging to the respondent --
Mahanagara Pafike, for short
_BBMP., theywr 1977, was visited with the
” ” ‘T “for payment of service fee muivalent; to 20%
rent, in the year 1997, and yet another
notice dated 28.3.2001 for enhanced rentals
“at 25% of the existing rent w.e.f. 1.4.01. Yet another
demand dated 19.8.2004 purported to be under
N
enhanced, the petitioner continued to
rents. Thereafter, for the firs:-‘fime. _
19.08.2004 the arrears of rents
demanded for the period 1. 1%.94_:
According to the BBM1?, 1-11¢
Committee for short held on
8.3.04 1.1.94 in
block perio<:"'e 01.01.94, 01.01.97,
01.0 of the claim for
enhancee . " –~ :i'e1'*1'*()spective effect.
V' . A ;¥;ea1:0.ed for the respondent – BBMP is
eijit to any statutozy provision under the
' Act. the T & FC to pass 21 resolution
year 2000 and again in the year 2004,
the rentals with retmspeciive efieet frem
j e1-.1. 94. 11" the BBMP did not have the 1-eq1a's11:e
VA pewer under the Act to increase the rentals with
bk
The petition is allowed in part.' M K
impugaed dated 3.8.2007
petitioner is directed to pay " 'R *'
1.4.2004 onwards. seciuenfiéfiiyr,
§
Annexures M and N i
csg