IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA. ' &
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY;C)F 2009- 'T
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICI§"R;§;M Maxim 1"-2I3 I;§I:$S?
WRIT PETITION 14 % {LI3~B'1\+'iP)vv
BETWEEN V
SM'? NAGARATNA _
w/0 MUNIRAJU V -
AGED ABOUT ~%3"~Yfi:aRS» H " '
R/AT NO 53}2,$c:U:94BA¥é:A3un:-
NEAR SHEEP YARD','--'E.?~M_I'FIi!'«!3LQ_C--Kf
NEW BAMBOO BAzAAmz,oA1;>T'TA--.
BANGALORE-£32 . _ '
- -_ 2 PETYFIONER
sri. h;{§'fARAJ'A&«KESHAVA K N, ADV. )
Aim "
..__.._...
1 T}I._E CGMMIESSIONER BBMP
V N R SQUARE
BANGALORE-02
AD§'I'i'IC)NA,I. CQMMISSIQN-ER WEST
BBMP
V' BASHYAM PARK
"SAMPIGE ROAD
MALLESHWARAM
BANGALORE-{)3
3 THE REVENUE OFFICER *
Q' Hi
b
-4-
2. The petifion is opposed by filing statemerjztof
objections dt. 20.4.2009 of the respondent K
centending that the petitioner and her ilk
unauthorisediy on the
Kumbaragundi belonging the
property was to be put to “for consm;ee¢,:%k5r a
commercial complex,v’t11e ‘Voecnpants
including the petitioner pmperty
fenced. eigzatozy of the letter
dt.29.10.fl’OQi3, Az3ne;§11ffe&–;§5:;’;'<éidd1essed to the petitioner,
to deposit – towards the value of the
unauthorieedly occupation, did
neithier[A1:eWe the" competence under the Act nor was
_authfn°ised' it is fer the Commissioner of BBMP, or
' W eouneii, to pass necessary order/Resolution in that
The rejection of the request for regularization by
AT :c o1'cier dt. 5.7.2008 Annexure–»K., of the Add}.
9' u 3 Commissioner (West) is stated to be legal and not ceiling
3
for interference.
-6-
AI1nexure~I~i has no applicatien to the pefitie1:iei1=*s
request.
5. Having heard the lea1f:1e{i~-.ce1§1 1§e_eI:’
parties, perused the Govt. I
undeubtediy celmnn No.10 pmsfitiee fer udf
existing houses at
Kumbarglmdi, Usman R¢ad,% the BBMP
and thereafte§*~V,£o;’1’e§rect–jtb1§iid.i:1gsv”§te be allotted to 36
famiiiesyiof Gangnen’ engaged by
the BBMP.T1 1e egspvm-3fal.:.”~é3.ece:fied in coiumn No.10 is
<1_1_ot 3re1a3_;_ion'A'te……t.:1e immovable property bearing
meast1m'1' g 10' X 12' which
the to be in unauthorised oecupatien.
' H H " .. , __6. 2 of the Govt, Order though states that all
eéproposals of the BBMP forwalfied to the
VT 'G'o§*erI1ment are approved subject to conditions detailed
"therein. In the absence of relevant material to support
the assertien that the petitioner's request te regular-ise
M
J-
the land unautherisedly occupied, was M
proposal for approve} by the Statei
assume that the same was eo.1}si<:Iei'eci"e.nd a}3'};1J§oxred':b'y.% "
the order A11nexure-H. There"e-{E.eousicieraE:i§e in
the submission of the that
the petitioner's subject
matter of 'to. In the
scheme of belonglng to
the the consent or
a I'CS{)I11tiO.{1 Of ' and in its absence the
Commgiseionef, more so in matters of Iegijlarizatjon of
'*eonsi;r*uetion. The Revenue Officer of the
of law having issued the letter
_da.teCi"—29;1t3;.§'C02, Annexure-A, cannot: invest a right in
W H " , _peti'i:ioz1er for regulamza' tion of Imauthorised
Even otherwise the petitioner cannot clam:
T Vase matter of right to be entitled to regularisation of the
x u : unauthorised occupation of land beiougng to BBMP.
M