N.SUDHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel Smt. Deepashree for the petitioners, learned counsel Sri. Subramanya R for respondent No.3 and learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1,

(2.) and 4. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the owners in possession of Khatha No.11/12 P.I.D.No.577, 15/16 P.I.D.No.584, 12/13 P.I.D.No.578, 14/15 P.I.D.No.582, 12/13 P.I.D.No.580 and 16/17 P.I.D.No.585 (Annexure-P). On obtaining permission under Annexure-P dtd. 21/1/2016, the petitioners proceeded to renovate the existing building in the land in question.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any notice or without initiating any proceedings in accordance with law, impugned notice dtd. 11/5/2016 is issued directing the petitioners to remove the northern and western portion of the construction, since it is contrary to C.D.P., within seven days. Notice also indicates that if the petitioners fail to remove the northern and western portion of the construction, the respondents would initiate action under Sec. 303 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act').