High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri K Muniraju S/O Sri. Karagappa vs The Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara … on 25 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri K Muniraju S/O Sri. Karagappa vs The Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara … on 25 March, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy


IN” THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, 3ANGAL€)RE

DATEI) THIS TI-E 25TH I>A*5zjo:a:-f MLAR’ ‘L CI{2€>:£§9.¢#”:’

THE HONBLE ma. ,I:Is’x*I<::§j 1fi ()KA_.H Emma?

WRIT ?ETI'rmN zi.§I”} 7, ‘rxsgvq Nfj;2;8 _ ” .
BYATARAYHNAPKAI RA’ ‘<1'§?v??i+f§ }'«iHA'E"A N0. 3 1 / :3 1
YASHOSANAGAR ._ "

JAKKUR PLANT’A’i’E()E£ »- V
OFF. 330 JAK1<:Uiag _A.E;:a=_Q:s~RoME,
BELLAR Y. ROAE), ._BAN{}ALC)RE~64.

———- PETETEONER

(1393 :» ;Pa, MJV )

Afsé

1 ‘ ERUHATH BANGALORE

.A MAHANEXGARA PALEKE
“~._N.R.SQUARE§
..’BANG§§LC)RI5I;–2

RERBY yrs COMMISSIOWER,

V W; THE’; JO1NT’COM§vI£SS§ONER

BBMP, BYATARAYANAPURA ZOEQE
BELLRRY ROAD, BANGALORE-92.
3 THE E§SS’1″”. EXECUTIVE ENG~iNEER
8MP, NORTH ZONE(BYA’TARAYANAPUI€z§ .2Z{.3N§§)

. pr0i3€:T€:d;:¥Lng;é’

other persons. N0 distinction, in law, can 59% _

as to entitle 3. dwarf to a better ‘ggnefit _–ti”1a:.’.1::

citizeztx.

“settied possession.” writ pe:t::iti<)1:1
and the Am1§x'.¥:f§:s, nothing more,
does not such a declaration in
exercise' so because it 13 a
pure < iu§;;s:iGr1 require an adjudication

a_ft€r ., a V..én:1c1'. éénnot be decided in a Writ

it from any angle, the petitioner is

..:10t Cflfifififid to the relief sought; for. The writ petition is

é_ar§ft_l§T0j11t merit and is aczzaraiingly rajected.

53 \'

Sd/~
Judge

egg

5. It is next contended tfiat L16 pet,1t;i:(§I’1er