Bengaluru: The High Court imposed a large fee of RS 6 Lakh in Mysuru’s man because he had occupied the house illegally built by Mysuru Urban Development Authority for the past 21 years.
It has shown that there is no allotment that can be claimed by someone who gets into public property by hooliganism and continues to occupy the mere soil so he is included in the oppressed class.
Justice Krishna S Dixit directed the GM Mahadeva applicant, said illegally occupying homes since 2000, to pay young in six weeks at a rate of rs 30,000 per year, although the value of the house rent is 7,500 per month.
The judge also ordered the government and young to start prosecution against the applicant and others because the court was told that 12,145 houses built by young people in various places, 208 were under illegal occupation.
Mahadeva, who claimed to belong to the oppressed class, said he occupied the house as a question “according to verbal guarantees given by engineers”.
He also challenged the ratification of 2521 January 2021 issued by young that all empty houses would be auctioned according to the rules.
However, rejecting the petition, Dixit justice notes that there is no future material in connection with the guarantee given by engineers and adding that (property) is not urinating in remote villages.
Justice Dixit also observed that there was a record placed in front of the court, the applicant harassed high-ranking officials by dragging them to the National Commission for the scheduled caste, the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission and Karnataka Commission SC / St.
He added that the commission was strange to be soft and pampering to the applicant even though he made claims that could not be justified at home grants on a “adverse ownership”.
The judge noted that in the previous petition by young people to the command authorized by the SC / SC commission, Mahadeva as respondents stated that he had compiled the election of assembly from the Chamundeshwari electoral district.
“Thus, the applicant is not naive in public life and public morality, to justify the protection that is looking at the hands of the SC / SC commission or this court.
In fact, such people damage the social image of the oppressed class,” said the judge, added that the court was added must take action on things like that with iron hands.
‘Letter of wild residents cannot claim the public property occupied’
