BENGALURU: Is there rule of law in city or jungle law? The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday posed this question to the authorities of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike for allowing an illegal construction on rajakaluve at Yalenahalli of Begur hobli in Bengaluru South taluk.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice H G Ramesh and Justice P S Dinesh Kumar lambasted the BBMP after the counsel of the petitioner J Sunil Kumar, who filed public interest litigation, drew the attention of the court on no steps being taken by the BBMP to stop illegal construction without any sanctioned plan.
The court took serious exception to the inaction of the BBMP and observed that allowing the illegal construction is a serious and disturbing issue. “The administration machinery has completely failed. The authorities were hand-in-glove otherwise the construction should have been stopped by now,” the court said.
K Arjun Varma, the counsel of the petitioner, submitted that one D Ramachandar is constructing a four-storeyed building encroaching the rajakaluve. The structure will obstruct the flow of stormwater and it may collapse any time on the neighbouring buildings.
The owner is also using dynamite for blasting the rocks, which is few metres away from the construction site, to use the stones for the construction of building, he argued. In reply, the counsel of BBMP submitted that they have halted the construction by issuing notice. The counsel of petitioner, however, submitted that the construction is still going on even today and he sees the workers on the site everyday as the site is near his residence. He even produced photographs in support of his arguments.
Then, the counsel of BBMP submitted that the authorities are feared to serve notice against an errant person under Section 321 of the KMC Act.
After this, the court observed: “Four storeyed building is being constructed without a sanctioned plan. Is there rule of law in city or jungle law? What are your engineers are doing? There is no enforcement of law.. They may be colluded with the building owner,” the court told the counsel of BBMP, before adjourning the matter awaiting response from the BBMP.