AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr.V.Krishna, Asst.Executive Engineer, Jeevan
Bhima Nagar Sub-Division, BBMP, Bengaluru, and
Dr.K.Sangamithra, In-charge Medical Officer of
C.V.Raman Nagar, Bengaluru, are present in the Court
as summoned by the previous order dated 13.12.2017.
However, they were unable to produce any record before
this Court showing issuance of any notice or order
against the petitioner for seizure of the premises in
question.
The grievance made by the petitioner in the
present case who filed this writ petition in this Court on
20.09.2017 with the following prayers, is that the
Respondents-BBMP Authorities have illegally seized the
premises in question of the petitioner without initiating
any proceedings against the petitioner or without
passing any order against the petitioner.
The prayers made in the writ petition are
quoted below for ready reference:-
"(i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to comply with legal notice dt:30/06/2017 produced at Annexure C.
(ii) Direct the respondents to pay the cost of this Writ Petition to the petitioner.
(iii) Grant such other relief as this Hon''ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice".
The learned counsel for the petitioner
Mr.Swaroop Anand has submitted that since no order or
notice was issued against the petitioner by the
Respondent-Authorities of the BBMP, the Advocate for
the petitioner has served a notice vide Annexure-C on
30.06.2017, which was duly received by the addressee
namely the Commissioner, BBMP and Asst.Executive Engineer, BBMP, Indiranagar, Bengaluru and
Acknowledgment Due Receipts bearing Signatures of
Respondents dated 04.07.2017 are produced on record
vide Annexure-D.
On the last occasion i.e., on 13.12.2017, this
Court has passed the following order:-
"1. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.Swaroop Anand for the petitioner submits that the 2nd Respondent-Asst.Executive Engineer, Jeevan Bhimanagar Division, Indira Nagar, 1st stage, BBMP, Bengaluru, has seized the business premises of the petitioner-landlord without serving any notice upon the petitioner and orally, he was informed that the notice was issued to the tenant of the petitioner, who has already vacated the premises in question and no such notice under Section 308 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, which empowers the Commissioner to require an alteration of the work or construction to fall in line with the sanction plan was never served upon the petitioner- landlord.
Despite query from the Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
before the Court that no such notice or document was ever served upon the petitioner before suddenly effecting the seizure of the property in question and this has resulted in the position that the tenant who has already vacated the premises not being allowed to take away his own movables from the said premises in question.
The matter would require consideration by this Court.
Issue notice to the Respondents. Mr.T.M.Venkata Reddy, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents- BBMP.
By the next date, the 2nd Respondent- Asst.Executive Engineer, Jeevan Bhimanagar Division, Indira Nagar, 1st stage, BBMP, Bengaluru, will file his personal Affidavit explaining the situation and also particularly as to why without any notice to the petitioner or his tenant, why the property in question has been seized without adjudicating the matter at all. If such response and Affidavit is not filed before the next date, the concerned official will remain present before the Court on the next date. Put up the matter again on 15.12.2017".
Today, though the Officials of the Respondent-
BBMP have appeared before the Court but they were
unable to produce any record before the Court for
perusal to show that any such proceedings have
culminated or any order against the petitioner has been
passed, so as to effect the seizure of the premises in
question.
In view of this, the writ petition deserves to be
allowed and the petitioner is at liberty to remove the
seal or seizure of the premises in question and go ahead
with the removal of the contents of the tenant in
question and use the premises in accordance with law.
With these observations, the writ petition is
disposed of. No costs.