LAWS(KAR)-2023-6-668

K.B. HIREMATH Vs. COMMISSIONER

Decided On June 15, 2023
K.B. Hiremath Appellant
V/S
COMMISSIONER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel Sri. Hanumanthareddy Sahukar for the petitioner, learned counsel Sri.Gangadhar J.M. for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel Sri.Shivaraj S. Balloli for respondent Nos.3 to 5.

(2.) This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus for a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the representations of the petitioner dtd. 1/12/2022 produced at Annexure-A and Annexure-B and consequently to clear illegal construction put up by respondent Nos.3 to 5 illegally encroaching upon Jambunatha Feeder Road. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent Nos.3 to 5 were putting up illegal construction in their property bearing property No.10/2/510-40, 10th ward, Gowlerahatti Jambunatha Feeder Road Area, Main Road, Hosapete city, Vijaynagara District. Being a respected member of the locality and the responsible citizen of the society, petitioner made representation with regard to illegal construction carried out on the Jambunath Feeder road and requested respondents No.1 and 2 by way of representation to take appropriate and immediate action and to stop the illegal construction being put up by the respondent Nos.3 to 5. Along with the said representation, petitioner also sought for furnishing of certain documents specified in the Annexure-B. According to the petitioner, he got a survey conducted by civil engineer himself and came to the conclusion that there has been encroachment of 6.5 mtrs from the approved building plan.

(3.) Upon receiving the representation from the petitioner, respondent No.1 issued notice to the respondent Nos.3 to 5 on 24/2/2022 under Sec. 187 of Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 and another notice came to be issued on 6/6/2023. Thereby the respondent No.1 has acted in pursuance to the representation made by the petitioner and initiated suitable actions in accordance with law by issuing a notice to the respondent Nos.3 to 5 which is yet to conclude in a logical conclusion. Petitioner's grievance before this Court is the inaction in not considering his representation at Annexures A and B.