The Hindu : Karnataka / Bangalore News : BMP action: court rules in favour of petitioner

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Jan 11, 2006

Karnataka

Karnataka - Bangalore

BMP action: court rules in favour of petitioner

Staff Reporter

HIGH COURTROUND-UP

Bangalore: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday said the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) had no power to collect development charges while changing or issuing a khata of a building which it had not spent on.

Justice Ram Mohan Reddy passed the order on a petition, which challenged the action of the BMP in collecting development charges while effecting change in khata of a flat owner.

Rajarao, a resident of Jayanagar, said he had attended a khata mela organised by the BMP in 2003. He applied for a change of khata but the corporation issued an endorsement stating that until development charges were paid, it could not be done. He contended that the builder of the apartment had paid development charges to the Bangalore Development Authority. However, he paid Rs. 12,000 towards development charges, before challenging the BMP action.

Mr. Ram Mohan Reddy, while ruling in favour of the petitioner, observed that the action of the BMP collecting development charges while changing a khata for a building it has not spent on amounts to unjust enrichment. Moreover, sections 461-467 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act state that the BMP can collect development charges only if it has spent money on a building, the court observed. The court directed the BMP not to insist on development charges while granting change of khata as both were independent procedures.

`Frame charges afresh'

The High Court on Tuesday directed a lower court to frame charges afresh against Bharathi Urs, daughter of former Chief Minister Late Devraj Urs, in connection with the murder of Chitralekha Urs. Justice A.C. Kabin directed the lower court to frame appropriate charges against Bharathi. Bharathi Urs had challenged the order framing charges against her on the ground that some of the sections invoked were irrelevant to the case.

The police apart from booking a case under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code had also invoked Sections 420 (cheating) and 203 (failure to give information) of the code. Her counsel, C.V. Nagesh, contended that the two sections invoked are irrelevant and hence the charges framed be set aside. He also told the court that the trial was scheduled for January 20. The High Court observed that the order of the lower court needs to be reconsidered and hence the charges need to be framed afresh. Bharathi Urs was charged with the murder of Chitralekha Urs over an alleged monetary dispute.

The police stated that she had murdered Chitralekha and dumped the body in Shiradi Ghat in January 2004.

Inquiry ordered

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed the Government to initiate disciplinary inquiry against an IAS officer, who was the Deputy Commissioner of Bellary district in December 1999, for not responding to the complaint of a citizen.

Justice Ram Mohan Reddy passed the order on a petition filed by Ganga Bai of Shiruguppa. The petitioner had said that the district authorities had failed to attend to her complaint on the flow of sewage from KHB Colony to her land despite her representations between 1996 and 2001. The court directed the authorities to take action to stop flow of sewage to her land from the KHB Colony.

Meanwhile, the court pulled up the then Deputy Commissioner for not properly responding to the complaint and also to the notice issued by the court. Hence, it directed the Government to take action against the then Deputy Commissioner and submit a compliance report in this regard within three months.

Stay on demolition

The High Court on Tuesday stayed the demolition of buildings on Chennakeshava Temple Road in Belur. Justice K.L. Manjunath also issued notice to the Government. B.N. Jagdish and others from Belur contended that the district administration of Hassan had issued demolition orders for road widening. The petitioners termed the action unfair.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Karnataka