<p>The high court directed former BBMP commissioner Manjunath Prasad and other officers to be present during the next hearing of a civil contempt petition.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A division bench comprising Justices Raghavendra Chauhan and H T Narendra Prasad was hearing the petition, which pertains to the setting up of an Indira Canteen in a public space.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The Bharat Ratna JRD Tata Nagar Residents Welfare Association has moved the court, saying the Palike had not followed the court orders.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The high court had on July 3, 2017, passed an order, stating that Indira Canteens should not be constructed in areas earmarked for parks and playgrounds.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Despite this, the BBMP had gone ahead with the construction of the canteen in an area identified for a park by the Bangalore Development Authority. The structure is near completion, the petition stated. It contended that the construction was in violation of Sections 6 and 8 of the Karnataka Parks and Playfields and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation ) Act, 1965.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The court adjourned the matter to June 20.</p>
<p>The high court directed former BBMP commissioner Manjunath Prasad and other officers to be present during the next hearing of a civil contempt petition.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A division bench comprising Justices Raghavendra Chauhan and H T Narendra Prasad was hearing the petition, which pertains to the setting up of an Indira Canteen in a public space.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The Bharat Ratna JRD Tata Nagar Residents Welfare Association has moved the court, saying the Palike had not followed the court orders.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The high court had on July 3, 2017, passed an order, stating that Indira Canteens should not be constructed in areas earmarked for parks and playgrounds.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Despite this, the BBMP had gone ahead with the construction of the canteen in an area identified for a park by the Bangalore Development Authority. The structure is near completion, the petition stated. It contended that the construction was in violation of Sections 6 and 8 of the Karnataka Parks and Playfields and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation ) Act, 1965.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The court adjourned the matter to June 20.</p>