High Court bench dismissed a PIL filed by a news editor seeking demolition of illegal construction. The Court found the petitioner lacked standing and bonafides, noting no public interest was affected and the case appeared motivated by personal vendetta.
Writ petition seeking demolition ordered to be dismissed.
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 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.15192 OF 2021 (LB-BMP-PIL)
BETWEEN:
MR.DINESH KUMAR D.B. S/O MR BASAVARAJAPPA K H, AGED 43 YEARS, HAVING RESIDENCE AT NO.116, 1ST FLOOR, EWS, OPP. GEM SCHOOL, KHB COLONY, 1ST STAGE, BASAWESHWARA NAGARA, BANGALORE 560079 WORKING AS NEWS EDITOR WITH M/S. ARYAVARTH PUBLICATIONS PVT. LTD., HAVING OFFICE AT NO 1/1A, VB COMPLEX, 2ND FLOOR, OPPOSITE MYSORE ROAD, TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, NEAR OLD TOLL GATE MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE 560023 E-MAIL : [email protected] PHONE-9741224861
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.ANUPAM AGARWAL, ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
ALSO AT NR COLONY, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE 560004, KARNATAKA, E-MAIL: [email protected] Ph: 080 22660000
…RESPONDENTS
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A.ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, TO DEMOLISH THE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION IN THE SAID SCHEDULE PROPERTY AS AN ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING MATERIALLY AFFECTS THE RIGHT TO OR ENJOYMENT OF THE PROPERTY BY THE PERSONS RESIDING IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND ETC.,
3
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned petition is filed in the nature of public interest litigation seeking writ of mandamus to demolish the illegal construction made in the schedule property.
4
furnish a copy of the sanctioned plan, approval plan, commencement certificate as well as occupancy certificate.
Court contending that the respondent No.1/Corporation is unwilling and also incapable of preventing illegal construction and therefore, the present writ petition is filed in the nature of public interest litigation seeking a mandamus to the respondent No.1 officials to take appropriate action against the illegal construction.
5
that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition in respect of one building which is situated at Basavanagudi. Therefore, we have serious doubts about the bonafides of the petitioner in filing the present writ petition. If this Court starts entertaining such writ petitions where a litigant, for reasons best known to him, can pick and choose one building in isolation and under the garb of public interest litigation, initiates public interest litigation, then this Court will be flooded with litigations of similar nature involving personal vengeance. It is a trite law that public interest litigations are to be entertained in only those cases where it is prosecuted to promote and indicate a public interest. On perusal of the material on record, we do not find any material which would indicate that public rights are affected.
6
which have brought positive changes in the country. The constitutional court's directions have immensely benefited marginalized sections of the society in a number of cases. The public interest litigation is an upshot and product of the Hon'ble Apex Court's deep and intense urge to fulfill its bounden duty and constitutional obligation. This constitutional obligation is being followed by the High Courts also and similar jurisdiction is exercised under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in deserving cases. In admitting public interest litigation, the Court has to strike balance between two conflicting interests. No individual should be allowed to vent his private vengeance and therefore, the courts have to be careful to see that behind the beautiful veil of public interest an ugly private malice, personal vendetta and vested interest is promoted under the garb of public interest litigation.
7
Violation of building byelaws, if any, cannot be agitated by way of public interest litigation, that too by a News Editor. If the courts do not restrict free flow of cases in the name of public interest litigation, the traditional litigation along with justice will suffer. The present writ petition lacks bonafides and if entertained would amount to abuse of public interest litigation.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/JUDGE
CA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition filed by a resident journalist to demolish a specific illegal construction in a different locality qualifies as a valid Public Interest Litigation or amounts to abuse of proces
Whether credentials of the petitioner and existence of genuine public interest warrant entertaining a PIL alleging violation of building byelaws.
Mr. Dinesh Kumar D.B.
The Commissioner of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
Assistant Director Town Planning (South), Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
Mr. Dinesh Bora
Ritu Raj Awasthi
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
