Sri a G Ramachandra v. the State of Karnataka
Case brief
What is this about?
In a writ petition for mandamus regarding unauthorized weighbridge and commercial building construction, the Court noted that the landowner had promised to obtain permissions before proceeding. Consequently, the Court did not issue directions to authorities based on this undertaking but directed them to act against future unauthorized development.
What did the court decide?
Respondents 5 and 6 directed to take appropriate action if the respondent 7 undertakes further development or construction without requisite permissions/licenses.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.2694 OF 2021 (LB - RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. A. G. RAMACHANDRA, S/O LATE R GANGADHARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT SREE BEERALINGESHWARA MILLS, MALLEPATTANA ROAD, ARAKALAGUD TOWN, CHANNAPATNA TALUK – 573 102, HASSAN DISTRICT.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI.BHADRINATH R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
- THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to direct the Chief Officer to implement the order dated 17.11.2020 against unauthorized construction and to take action against the shop owner.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SRI. A. G. RAMACHANDRA
- respondent
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- respondent
THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, MYSORE DIVISION
- respondent
THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
- respondent
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · June
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/2694/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court