M/s Rajatha Enterprises Vs. S.K. Sharma & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. (s) 1122 of 1987.
(From the judgment and order dated 18.7.86 of the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No.15996/86 (Applied from))
(From the judgment and order dated 18.7.86 of the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No.15996/86 (Applied from))
Petitioner: M/s Rajatha Enterprises
Respondent: S.K. Sharma & Ors.
Apeal: Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. (s) 1122 of 1987.
(From the judgment and order dated 18.7.86 of the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No.15996/86 (Applied from))
(From the judgment and order dated 18.7.86 of the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No.15996/86 (Applied from))
Judges: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH & K.N. SINGH, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Sep 08, 1987
Appearances:
Mr. M.C. Bhandare, Sr. Advocate, Mr. K.R. D. Karanth, Mr. G.S. Bhat, Mr. Mohan Katarki, Mr. T.Sridharan, Advocates for the Petitioners.
Mr. Dr. Y.S. Chitale, Sr. Advocate, Mr. H.D. Narayan, Mr. R.B. Datar, Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocates.
Head Note:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Constitution of India, 1950; Article 136 – SLP not entertained against Judgment in writ petition directing Commissioner to reinvestigate the alleged violations of building laws – Proper Course is to file fresh writ petition or interlocutory application in disposed of writ petition challenging Commissioner’s report.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
We are informed that subsequent to the Judgment of the High Court the Commissioner of the Bangalore Mahanagar Palika has examined the question pursuant to the direction of the High Court in the Writ Petition and has given its decision. In the circumstances we feel that we should not entertain this Petition at this stage under Article 136 of the Constitution. We, however, permit the petitioner if he is so advised to file a petition before the High Court questioning the correctness of the Order passed by the Commissioner or an interlocutory application in the Writ Petition seeking appropriate relief before the learned Judges who disposed of the Writ Petition so that they may pass appropriate orders on the Writ Petition or the application as the case may be. If such a petition is filed we request the High Court to dispose the matter expeditiously. The High Court may also consider whether the Petition may be permitted to use the building on appropriate terms pending disposal of the Petition or application before them. We leave the questions raised in this Petition open. The Petition is disposed of accordingly.
We are informed that subsequent to the Judgment of the High Court the Commissioner of the Bangalore Mahanagar Palika has examined the question pursuant to the direction of the High Court in the Writ Petition and has given its decision. In the circumstances we feel that we should not entertain this Petition at this stage under Article 136 of the Constitution. We, however, permit the petitioner if he is so advised to file a petition before the High Court questioning the correctness of the Order passed by the Commissioner or an interlocutory application in the Writ Petition seeking appropriate relief before the learned Judges who disposed of the Writ Petition so that they may pass appropriate orders on the Writ Petition or the application as the case may be. If such a petition is filed we request the High Court to dispose the matter expeditiously. The High Court may also consider whether the Petition may be permitted to use the building on appropriate terms pending disposal of the Petition or application before them. We leave the questions raised in this Petition open. The Petition is disposed of accordingly.
