R VEERANNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKARESENTED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has sought for quashing the endorsements dated 4. 2. 2003 and 18. 3. 2003 vide annexures-D' and 'e' respectively issued by the 3rd respondent - Bangalore Development authority (BDA) and the notice dated 27. 6. 2003 vide Annexure-'c' issued by the 2nd respondent-District Magistrate, Bangalore Urban District.

(2.) HEARD the learned advocates appearing on behalf of both the parties and perused the material on record.

(3.) PETITIONER is the owner of 20 guntas of land forming part of Survey No. 54/2a of nagadevanahalti village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. The said land is converted for the use of non-agricultural purposes under Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Petitioner applied for grant of No Objection Certificate for constructing Permanent Cinema theatre on 12. 2. 1992. Thereafter petitioner filed an application before the 2nd respondent-District Magistrate on 17. 8. 2001 seeking permission or No Objection Certificate for locating permanent cinema theatre. The second respondent invited for the opinion of the authorities viz. , The Executive Engineer, P/w. D. , Bangalore Rural, Health Officer, Bangalore district, the Superintendent of Police, Bangalore Urban District and the Kengeri Municipal council. AD these authorities gave their no objection to the 2nd respondent for granting licence to the petitioner for the purpose of construction of cinema theatre over the aforesaid property. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner directed the petitioner to obtain an order from the appropriate authority with regard to change of land use i. e,, from residential to commercial purpose by issuing notice as per Annexure-C dated 27. 6. 2003. Even prior to that date, the petitioner had filed applications on 5. 3. 2001 and on 10. 1. 2002 before the Planning Authority (Bangalore Development Authority) for grant of an order relating to change of user of land. The said application was rejected by the Planning Authority (BDA) as per Annexure-'d' dated 4. 2. 2003 on the ground that the land in question is situated in a predominantly residential area and if the commercial activities are permitted to be carried on in such residential area, it may create serious problems to the residential zone. However, one more application is filed by the petitioner requesting the Planning Authority to reconsider its earlier stand. The said application is also rejected by the Planning Authority as per Annexure-'e' dated 18. 3. 2003. Therefore, this writ petition is filed assailing the correctness of the notice vide Annexure-'c' dated 27. 6. 2003 and the endorsements issued at Annexures-'d' and 'e'.