Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a federation of residents' welfare associations, filed a public interest litigation in 2006 alleging encroachment on approximately 3 acres of land in Sy.No.90 at Chamundinagara, reserved as a park under a layout plan approved by the Bangalore Development Authority in 1976. The land had been partially occupied by slum dwellers, used for dumping debris, and a portion leased to Indian Oil Corporation for a petrol bunk. The petitioner sought directions to preserve the park, withdraw the petrol bunk allotment, and stop illegal constructions. During the first round of proceedings, BDA and the Slum Board gave an undertaking to develop the remaining 2 acres 5 guntas as a park and to relocate the slum dwellers within one year. The court disposed of the writ petition on 13.04.2011 based on these undertakings. Later, alleging non-compliance, the petitioner filed a contempt petition, which was dismissed for want of a positive direction. A special leave petition was filed before the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, some slum dwellers and the Slum Board filed review petitions, arguing they were not heard. The High Court allowed the reviews, recalled the 2011 order, and directed fresh hearing, also impleading the slum dwellers as respondents. The Supreme Court consequently dismissed the SLP as infructuous, directing the High Court to dispose of the writ petition within six months. On re-hearing, BDA revised its stand, stating that due to statutory allotments, only 1 acre 3¾ guntas of park land remained available. The court noted discrepancies and expected the authorities to honour their statements. The matter remained pending for further orders.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Public Interest Litigation - Preservation of Public Parks - Constitution of India, Arts. 226, 227 - In a PIL alleging encroachment of land reserved for park, the Bangalore Development Authority and Karnataka Slum Clearance Board gave undertakings to develop the remaining park area and rehabilitate slum-dwellers. Held: The writ petition was disposed of on the basis of these undertakings, which were binding on the authorities (Paras 6, 11).
B) Slum Clearance - Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973, S. 3 - Declaration of Slum Area - Part of the land in Sy.No.90 was declared a slum area under Section 3 of the Act; the notification was not challenged by the petitioner. Held: The petitioner could not find fault with the determination under the Act (Paras 3, 11).
C) Civil Procedure - Review - Recall of Order - Violation of Natural Justice - Review petitions filed by slum-dwellers were allowed on the ground that they were not heard in the original proceedings. Held: The earlier order was recalled and the writ petition restored for fresh hearing, ensuring an opportunity to the affected parties (Paras 8-9).
D) Contempt of Court - Undertakings - Positive Direction Required - A contempt petition alleging non-compliance of the earlier order was dismissed because the operative portion of the order did not contain a positive direction. Held: Contempt jurisdiction cannot be invoked without a positive direction (Para 7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the land reserved for park was encroached upon; whether directions should be issued to preserve the park and remove encroachments; whether the earlier undertaking to develop the park was binding; whether the review petition recalling the earlier order was valid.
Law Points
- public interest litigation
- park preservation
- slum declaration
- review of order
- contempt of court
- undertaking
Case Details
2018 LawText (KAR) (12) 3
W.P.No.8117/2006 (GM – RES)
Dinesh Maheshwari, Chief Justice; S. Sujatha, J.
B.S. Murali (Petitioner); D.N. Nanjunda Reddy, M.N. Ramanjaneya Gowda (R1); V. Sreenidhi (R2); M.P. Srikanth (R3); K. Krishna (R4); Prithvi Raj, B.K. Sridhar (R5); A.V. Srihari (R6); Y.K. Narayana Sharma (R7); K.B. Onkar (R8-R17)
Abhaya, A Federation of Residents Welfare Association / Establishment / Institutions of Ward-54, Srinivasanagara, represented by its President Sri Y. Damodhara
1. The Bangalore Development Authority; 2. The Bangalore Mahanagara Palike; 3. The Karnataka Slum Clearance Board; 4. The Managing Director, Metro Railway; 5. M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.; 6. M/s. Kalabyrava Service Station; 7. M/s. East Coast Construction Industries Ltd.; 8. Smt. P.M. Margrate; 9. Sri Perumal; 10. Smt. D. Rathna; 11. Smt. Cheluvamma; 12. Smt. Mangala; 13. Sri Nagaraj; 14. Smt. Rukmini; 15. Smt. Bhagyamma; 16. Sri Radhakrishna; 17. Smt. Jayamma
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Public Interest Litigation filed by a residents' welfare federation seeking to preserve land reserved as a public park and to remove encroachments.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing BDA and BBMP to preserve and maintain the schedule land as park, to withdraw the allotment of part of the land for a petrol bunk, and to stop illegal constructions.
Filing Reason
Alleged encroachment on 3 acres of land in Sy.No.90, reserved as a park under a 1976 layout plan, and its conversion into a slum area, debris dumping site, and petrol bunk, causing health hazards.
Previous Decisions
On 13.04.2011, the writ petition was disposed of based on undertakings by BDA and the Slum Board to develop the remaining park area and rehabilitate slum dwellers. On 15.12.2017, this order was recalled on review petitions by slum dwellers, restoring the writ for fresh hearing.
Issues
Whether the land reserved for park was validly encroached upon and needed judicial intervention for preservation.
Whether the declaration of a part of the land as slum area under the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973 was legal and binding.
Whether the allotment of land for a petrol bunk by BDA was contrary to the original reservation.
Whether the undertakings given by the authorities before the court on 13.04.2011 were binding and enforceable.
Whether the review petitions by the slum dwellers were maintainable and whether the earlier order should be recalled for want of opportunity of hearing.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner alleged that the land reserved for park was illegally encroached upon by slum dwellers and misused, and a petrol bunk was wrongly permitted.
BDA submitted that 35 guntas of land had been transferred to the Slum Board, some to IOCL, and the remainder would be developed as park; they gave an undertaking to complete the park development within one year.
Slum Board gave an undertaking to complete regulated construction and relocate slum dwellers within one year, and to clear and maintain the area thereafter.
Respondent IOCL contended that the petrol bunk served public interest.
Slum dwellers, in their review petition, argued that they were not heard in the original proceedings, and the order was passed behind their back, violating natural justice.
BDA later revised its stand, stating that the earlier undertaking regarding 2 acres 5 guntas of park was made under a mistake of fact, and only 1 acre 3¾ guntas was actually available for park.
Judgment Excerpts
It is submitted at the hands of the learned counsel for the respondents that the aforesaid final notification has not been assailed at the hands of the federation/welfare association and as such, it is not open to the members of the federation/welfare association to find fault with the aforesaid determination in consonance with the provisions of the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973.
In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel representing respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3, we are satisfied that the prayers raised in the instant writ petition to the extent that they can be given effect to, have been conceded. As such, the instant writ petition is disposed of in terms of the undertaking given by the learned counsel representing respondent nos. 1 to 3.
Procedural History
1. 2006: Writ Petition No.8117/2006 filed in the High Court; 2. 21.08.2006: Cause title amended to implead IOCL; 3. 18.09.2006: Cause title amended to implead petrol station proprietor; 4. 18.01.2007: Cause title amended to implead East Coast Construction; 5. 13.04.2011: Writ petition disposed of recording undertakings of BDA and Slum Board; 6. 10.06.2014: Contempt petition CCC No.634/2014 dismissed for want of positive direction; 7. SLP No.26906/2014 filed before Supreme Court; 8. 15.12.2017: Review petitions allowed, order dated 13.04.2011 recalled, writ petition restored; 9. 02.04.2018: Slum dwellers impleaded as respondents 8-17; 10. Supreme Court dismissed SLP as infructuous with direction to dispose of writ petition within six months; 11. 22.10.2018: Court noted changed stand of BDA and expected compliance; 12. 21.12.2018: Matter reserved and order pronounced (details incomplete).
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
- Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973: Section 3
