<p>A Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka said on Friday that only a park should be developed on the land earmarked for the purpose in Vyalikaval, and not the tennis/basketball court which has been built on the place.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The Bench, comprising Chief Justice Vikramjit Sen and Justice B V Nagarathna, allowed the prayer of Jyothi Bhat, an advocate, who had challenged the construction of a tennis/ basketball court on the land meant for a public park. <br /><br />The civic agency spent Rs 80 lakh on the sports facility. Bhat, however, questioned the move and approached the High Court, stating that only a park should be developed as that would cater to all the citizens instead of the tennis/basketball court that would be useful to only sportspersons. <br /><br />Besides, the place’s proximity to a slum emphasised that a park should be developed on the site.</p>
<p>A Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka said on Friday that only a park should be developed on the land earmarked for the purpose in Vyalikaval, and not the tennis/basketball court which has been built on the place.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The Bench, comprising Chief Justice Vikramjit Sen and Justice B V Nagarathna, allowed the prayer of Jyothi Bhat, an advocate, who had challenged the construction of a tennis/ basketball court on the land meant for a public park. <br /><br />The civic agency spent Rs 80 lakh on the sports facility. Bhat, however, questioned the move and approached the High Court, stating that only a park should be developed as that would cater to all the citizens instead of the tennis/basketball court that would be useful to only sportspersons. <br /><br />Besides, the place’s proximity to a slum emphasised that a park should be developed on the site.</p>
