HC declines to interfere in BBMP eviction order on Mantri Tranquil

Palike should have served notices instead of eviction orders: Owners

HC declines to interfere in BBMP eviction order on Mantri Tranquil

In a major setback to the Mantri Developers, accused of encroaching upon the Storm Water Drain (SWD) for their Mantri Tranquil project off Kanakapura Road near Uttarahalli, the High Court on Thursday declined to interfere in the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike’s (BBMP) eviction order.

Hearing the petition filed by Mantri Tranquil Apartment Owners’ Association against the BBMP order for the eviction of the two structures on the Raja Kaluve, Justice Dilip P Bhosale said, “I don’t think I can interfere. I cannot pass an order which defeats the purpose of the public interest litigation (PIL), based on which this court (Karnataka High Court) had passed an order (on August 4, 2011).”

As the counsel for the petitioner questioned the basis for preparing the survey sketch based on which the BBMP issued the eviction order, Justice Bhosale maintained that the government went by its revenue records.

Refraining to pass an order on Thursday, Justice Bhosale said the petitioners can either question the survey sketch or the order passed by the court on August 4, 2011, in a PIL filed by the Five Years Law Course Advocates’ Association.

The counsel for the petitioners had argued on Tuesday that the BBMP should have served notices to the encroachers instead of passing eviction orders.

However, the counsel for the BBMP said it was not a notice but an order passed by the Palike under Section 288 D of the KMC Act, which enables the civic agency to raze illegal structures on government properties without serving any notices. 

The Palike had referred to the 2011 High Court order in which the BBMP had given an undertaking through an affidavit to raze buildings under Section 288 D and the High Court had agreed for it.On Thursday, the court sought the copy of the affidavit which the Palike counsel submitted. Justice Bhosale said, “You can certainly make an application in the PIL challenging the provision of action under Section 288-D of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation (KMC) Act.”

Background

Based on a survey sketch prepared by the Bangalore Urban district authorities on December 6, 2013, the BBMP had served two notices on the Mantri Tranquil Residents’ Welfare Association. 

The first notice said that the Mantri Developers have interrupted the natural course of SWD by leveling it. In the encroached portion they have built a boundary wall, parking lot and a park. The second notice said that they were letting untreated sewage into the SWD outside their apartment complex, thereby polluting the Subramanyapura Lake in the downstream. 

Water contaminated

The polluted lake is leading to the contamination of ground water and increase in mosquito menace.

The BBMP later communicated to the Bescom about the illegalities in the Mantri Tranquil, following which power connection was snapped from C and D block of the apartment complex. 

Challenging the disconnection of power, Mantri Tranquil Owners Association filed two petitions in the High Court- one against the Bescom and the second one, against the BBMP. 

While the High Court ordered restoring power, it refused to give any respite in the BBMP case.

DH Newsletter Privacy Policy Get the top news in your inbox
GET IT
Comments (+)