<p>The High Court of Karnataka on Tuesday issued a notice to the BBMP in a matter regarding the closure of a restaurant in the city.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Justice Aravind Kumar was hearing a petition filed by Amit Agarwal, the owner of 'Tippler on the Roof', a lounge restaurant, who had moved the court challenging the sealing of the restaurant premises by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).</p>.<p class="bodytext">According to the petitioner, the civic body had earlier sealed its premises on April 28, 2017, on the basis of a notice issued on April 1, 2017, citing noise pollution by the restaurant as a reason. However, the BBMP removed the seal on May 10, 2017, after it was satisfied that there was no illegality or noise pollution by the petitioner.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner states that the BBMP again sealed the petitioner's premises on December 20 on the basis of the notice dated April 1, 2017, and had not issued any fresh notice or intimation.</p>.<p class="bodytext">According to the petitioner, the sealing of the restaurant is illegal and this has badly affected 70 employees working in the restaurant.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner has also sought to quash BBMP's April 1, 2017, notice.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The matter was adjourned to December 28.</p>
<p>The High Court of Karnataka on Tuesday issued a notice to the BBMP in a matter regarding the closure of a restaurant in the city.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Justice Aravind Kumar was hearing a petition filed by Amit Agarwal, the owner of 'Tippler on the Roof', a lounge restaurant, who had moved the court challenging the sealing of the restaurant premises by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).</p>.<p class="bodytext">According to the petitioner, the civic body had earlier sealed its premises on April 28, 2017, on the basis of a notice issued on April 1, 2017, citing noise pollution by the restaurant as a reason. However, the BBMP removed the seal on May 10, 2017, after it was satisfied that there was no illegality or noise pollution by the petitioner.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner states that the BBMP again sealed the petitioner's premises on December 20 on the basis of the notice dated April 1, 2017, and had not issued any fresh notice or intimation.</p>.<p class="bodytext">According to the petitioner, the sealing of the restaurant is illegal and this has badly affected 70 employees working in the restaurant.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner has also sought to quash BBMP's April 1, 2017, notice.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The matter was adjourned to December 28.</p>
