The High Court disposed of this PIL seeking removal of gates in gated communities upon preliminary hearing. The Court dismissed it due to lack of specific details, lack of locus standi, and absence of prior representation to authorities.
Relief sought for removal of gates was declined.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.14938 OF 2020(GM-RES-PIL)
BETWEEN:
SRI. MATHEW THOMAS S/O LATE T.P.JOHN AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.2, 'ARISTOS' SOBHA CITY THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU - 560 064
... PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. NITIN .A.M, ADVOCATE)
AND: 1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2 . KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001
3 . THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA SAHAKARA SOUDHA MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE - 560 003
4 . BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE REP BY ITS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560 002
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. VIJAYAKUMAR A PATIL, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE AN ORDER TO THE RESPONDENTS 1,2,3 AND 4 HEREIN DIRECTING THEM TO HAVE ALL GATES IN GATED COMMUNITIES REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND TO REPORT COMPLETION OF THE SAID ACTION WITH PROOF OF HAVING DONE SO TO THIS HONBLE COURT AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRILIMINARY HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Apart from the fact that the petition does not contain any details about the details of the Gated Communities in respect of which the relief is claimed and the locus of the petitioner to maintain this public interest litigation, before filing the petition seeking a relief in the nature of a mandamus, the petitioner has not made a representation to the concerned authorities seeking remedial measures.
Apex Court in the case of Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Limited and others vs Union of India1 , the law has been laid
1 (1974) 2 SCC 630
down that in absence of any such demand for justice and refusal thereof, a writ Court should not entertain a petition seeking a writ of mandamus.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/JUDGE
*alb/-.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition can be admitted when it lacks details of gated communities, lacks locus standi, and no prior representation was made to authorities?
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued in absence of demand for justice and refusal thereof as per established law?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Limited and others vs Union of IndiaExplained¶22
(1974) 2 SCC 630 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
SRI MATHEW THOMAS
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
ABIHAYA OKA
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
