kalasipalyam: Hc Relief For 28 Occupants Of Razed Shops Near Bus Stand | Bengaluru News – Times of India


BENGALURU: Granting relief to 28 occupants of shops abutting Kalasipalyam bus stand, which were dismantled more than a decade ago owing to their dilapidated state, the high court has directed BBMP to provide them alternative accommodation at Sri Krishnarajendra Market by July-end, in terms of the undertaking given to the court.
The order was passed on a petition filed by Mohammed Zafrulla and others.
The petitioners had approached the court seeking directions for providing different accommodation as well as Rs 50,000 each as compensation, with regard to the order passed by State Human Rights Commission on July 30, 2011.
Opposing the petition, the civic body said compensation as per the SHRC order was already paid in 2014 and the petitioners had refused to accept the substitute premises shown to them.
BBMP also filed an affidavit on April 8, 2022, stating that the petitioners would be accommodated on the second floor of the commercial building situated at KR Market, but they weren’t willing.
Perusing the records, justice Krishna S Dixit said it isn’t a simple case of landlord and tenant or licensor and licensee. “Admittedly, the petitioners were lawful occupants of the premises owned by BBMP, which is a statutory local body. The structures having been dismantled, there was an assurance given to the petitioners to accommodate them elsewhere so that they could run their business in accordance with the law. The right to do business has a constitutional guarantee vide Article 19(1)(g). If business premises are taken away, the right to business is impaired,” the judge noted in his order.
Not Euclid’s theorem
The judge negated the petitioners’ contention that the other accommodation sought to be given now is not suitable for business.
“The SHRC report cannot be read as Euclid’s theorem. The text of the report has to be construed with common sense even when it is not a direction proprio vigore (by its own force) enforceable. The writ (constitutional) court has to do substantial justice and it does not undertake an exercise in a pharmaceutical laboratory, where things are done with mathematical accuracy. ‘One pound of flesh and not a drop of blood’, said Portia in Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice. This needs to be kept in mind by the litigants who seek refuge under the umbrella of the writ court,” justice Dixit observed.
Advertisement





Source link

Advertisement

Sagar Biswas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.