NIRUPAMA UPADAYA v. UDUPI CITY MUNICIPALITY

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.12494 OF 2022 (LB-RES) …PETITIONER BETWEEN: NIRUPAMA UPADAYA, D/O LATE KRISHNAMURTY AITHAL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT 76 BADAGUBETTU, BAILURU, UDUPI - 576 101. (BY SRI. HARISH M. G., ADVOCATE) AND:

UDUPI CITY MUNICIPALITY UDUPI - 576 101 REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER

G. SHREEPATI RAO, AGED 45 YEARS S/O LATE G KESHAVA RAO R/AT DOOR NO. 2/1/89, GUNDIBAIL, KUNJIBETTU POST, UDUPI - 576 102. UDUPI DISTRICT. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABDULLA T. I., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. S.K. ACHARYA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20106 WP No. 12494 of 2022 HC-KAR ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER VIDE ORDER DIRECT THE R-1 TO STOP THE PROCESS OF DEMOLITION OF THE PETITIONERS BUILDING AS PER THE DEMOLITION ORDER NOTICE BEARING NO.UNASA:A3/BA.07/2010-11 DATED 27.05.2022 UNDER KARNATAKA 187(9)(G) OF MUNICIPALITIES ACT 1964 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-J AND ETC. SECTION THE THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER On the ground that the petitioner has put up construction in violation of building bye-laws and sanctioned plan impugned order has been passed against the petitioner by the first respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed with the following prayers: WHEREFORE, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to; i. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing Respondent No.1 to stop the process of demolition of the Petitioner's building as per the demolition order notice issued to the Petitioner vide order No.G£À¸À:A3.BA.07/2010-11 bearing 27.05.2022 under Section 187(9)(G) of Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 produced at Annexure-'J'; - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:20106 WP No. 12494 of 2022 HC-KAR ii. Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper at the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

2. On 21.12.2023, this Court has passed the following order:

The respondent No.1 is directed to cause a inspection of the property of the petitioner bearing Sy.No.135/9 of 76 Bedagubettu Village, Udupi Taluku to ascertain if the construction put up by the petitioner is in accordance with the plan sanction, if not, what are the violations in terms of setback, FAR, ground coverage and height of the building. The inspection to be carried out commencing from 10.30 a.m. on 16.1.2024, the report to be filed on 7.2.2024. Re-list on 20.2.2024. Respondent No.1 is restrained from taking any corrosive steps against the petitioner till the next date of hearing.

Pursuant to the said order, first respondent has inspected the property of the petitioner and has filed an inspection report along with a memo dated 06.02.2024 and again another memo dated 12.07.2024. In the said inspection reports respondent No.1 mentions certain deviations in the construction put up by the petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20106 WP No. 12494 of 2022 HC-KAR

4. The petitioner disputes the finding of the inspection reports.

This Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot examine disputed question of facts. Under the circumstances, this Court will have to proceed on the submission made by respondent No.1 regarding the construction put up by the petitioner.