Bengaluru: How violators dodge BBMP demolition

In order to derail BBMP’s proceedings of demolishing illegal buildings, many errant builders and landlords are making a beeline to the City Civil and Sessions Court by instituting parallel cases without disclosing the demolition orders passed against their properties.

Several such instances, designed to secure a stay order by subverting the legal system, have cropped up after the civic body was empowered to issue the demolition orders under the new BBMP Act.

In 2022 alone, more than 700 cases were filed against the BBMP in the civil courts. “Over 50 per cent of these cases are frivolous,” suspect citizen groups who are fighting against illegal buildings.

Also Read | Wall in SWD buffer zone must go: NGT

DH reviewed multiple cases where builders have obtained a temporary or permanent injunction from the civil courts, restraining the BBMP from demolishing the building or interfering with the plaintiff.

Although it takes a single appearance by the BBMP’s empanelled advocates to have the case dismissed, prolonged absenteeism has been the recurring theme. Frequent absenteeism goes against the BBMP’s written undertaking before the high court that it would appropriately act against illegal buildings.

According to the BBMP Act, the assistant executive engineer (AEE) is authorised to issue demolition notices if the building is not found to be in conformity with laws. The builder can appeal against the orders with the chief commissioner of the BBMP, which was earlier heard by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT).

‘Anatomy of the scam’

When demolition orders are issued or violations are so flagrant that they cannot be made to comply with the sanctioned plan, a pattern has emerged where errant builders institute parallel proceedings before the City Civil Courts.

“This is an abuse of the legal system,” Suhas Ananth Rajkumar, an office-bearer of the Varthur Road Residents’ Welfare Association, said. He gave an example of original suit (OS) 26588/2022 where the builder suppressed the fact that there is an appeal currently before the chief commissioner of the BBMP (Appeal 170/2022), and secured an interim order preventing BBMP officers from demolishing the property.

Rajkumar also shared similar interim orders, where errant builders make the representation that they are being unnecessarily harassed by the BBMP, without disclosing that demolition orders have already been issued.

Speaking to DH, BBMP’s chief commissioner Tushar Girinath said he was aware of these issues. “I have discussed with the legal cell on how to address this issue. We are exploring the option of approaching the high court and seeking some directions so that the City Civil Court is barred from issuing stay orders in the name of harassment,” he said.

Solutions

* BBMP must make available all details of pending appeals, including the name of particles, observations on each hearing, the order details against which the appeal is being made etc on its website

* BBMP must institute contempt proceedings against anyone falsely instituting frivolous cases at the City Civil Courts without disclosing that there are already appeals pending under the appropriate procedures

* BBMP should report all empaneled advocates found to be cooperating with the opposite party to the bar council to have their professional license suspended