<p>The high court directed the BBMP to depute an official to visit structures violating the building plan. If the building is occupied, it should initiate immediate action, the court said.</p>.<p>It was hearing a petition filed by the J P Nagar 4th Phase Dollars Layout Residents Welfare Association that had moved court over the illegal construction of a residential-cum-commercial complex in the area.</p>.<p>The petitioner stated that H S Rukmini, a Dollars Colony resident, had illegally constructed the complex, the height of which is more than what was specified in the sanctioned plan and that additional floors have been constructed.</p>.<p>The petitioner submitted representations to the authorities concerned in this regard. The Assistant Director of Town Planning (South) BBMP had written a letter to the BBMP chief engineer seeking action under the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act 1976. But the BBMP authorities have not taken any action.</p>.<p>Following this, the petitioner approached the court seeking interim directions to the authorities to not issue an occupancy certificate to the 6th respondent for violating the building plan.</p>.<p>The hearing of the case was adjourned to July 23.</p>
<p>The high court directed the BBMP to depute an official to visit structures violating the building plan. If the building is occupied, it should initiate immediate action, the court said.</p>.<p>It was hearing a petition filed by the J P Nagar 4th Phase Dollars Layout Residents Welfare Association that had moved court over the illegal construction of a residential-cum-commercial complex in the area.</p>.<p>The petitioner stated that H S Rukmini, a Dollars Colony resident, had illegally constructed the complex, the height of which is more than what was specified in the sanctioned plan and that additional floors have been constructed.</p>.<p>The petitioner submitted representations to the authorities concerned in this regard. The Assistant Director of Town Planning (South) BBMP had written a letter to the BBMP chief engineer seeking action under the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act 1976. But the BBMP authorities have not taken any action.</p>.<p>Following this, the petitioner approached the court seeking interim directions to the authorities to not issue an occupancy certificate to the 6th respondent for violating the building plan.</p>.<p>The hearing of the case was adjourned to July 23.</p>
