MADHUSUDAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondent Nos.1 and 3.

(2.) Notice to other respondents is not necessary for the following reasons.

(3.) The petitioner has been raising objections for establishment and operation of a car washing unit and wheel alignment centre in the property abutting the residential building of the petitioner. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.No.24497/2021 seeking a direction to the Commissioner of the City Municipality, Bhadravathi, not to grant permission to the 5th respondent herein who sought to commence the said unit. This Court, by order dtd. 27/6/2022 directed the Commissioner to consider the representation given by the petitioner and pass necessary orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the petitioner once again gave a representation. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Contempt Court in CCC.No.1019/2022 alleging non-compliance of the orders passed by this Court. During the course of the contempt proceedings, it appears that the impugned endorsement dtd. 7/1/2023 was passed by the Commissioner of the City Municipality, and taking note of the same, the contempt proceedings were dropped.