Two linked writ appeals were dismissed as withdrawn by the Supreme Court on the ground that the permission granted was contrary to the development plan.
Rejected the prayer to set aside the appellate order; dismissed writ appeals as withdrawn with liberty to file a review petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT APPEAL NO. 484 OF 2021(LB-RES) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO. 489 OF 2021(LB-RES)
IN WA NO.484/2021 BETWEEN:
STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.S.RAJASHEKAR, AGA)
AND:
2
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SANTHOSH.S.GOGI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO 1.CALL FOR RECORDS 2. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.03.2021 IN W.P. NO. 337/2021 ( LB-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT APPEAL AND 3.PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER / ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEMS FIT.
IN WA NO.489/2021 BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE AND HARIHARA TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY, DEVARAJ ARASU LAYOUT, A BLOCK, PB ROAD, DAVANAGERE 577006
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.R L N MURTHY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
3
DAVANGERE 577006
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.RAJASHEKAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO a)SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23/03/2021 IN WP NO.337/2021 (LB-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT APPEAL AND b)PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER/ORDERS.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned Government Advocate was fair enough in making a statement before this Court that the permission granted to other individuals in respect of Sy.No.99/8 was contrary to the development plan and they are initiating action in the matter. He has stated that the aforesaid fact was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and
4
therefore, liberty be granted to file a review petition stating all facts before the learned Single Judge.
this Court that a contempt petition is also pending.
5
The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
CA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to set aside the single judge order allowing the writ petition or dismiss it as withdrawn.
State of Karnataka Rep. by Its Principal Secretary to Govt, Department of Urban Development
Smt. Vanitha L W/o. Sri. B V Jagdeesh
The Commissioner Davanagere and Hariharra Town Planning Authority
Satish Chandra Sharma
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
