Court terms BBMP a ‘mischief monger’

Court terms BBMP a ‘mischief monger’

Staff Reporter

‘Revenue inspectors continue to flout court directions and rules’

BBMP told to conduct refresher courses for revenue inspectors

BANGALORE: The Karnataka High Court on Monday came down heavily on the Bruhut Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and orally observed that functioning of Revenue Inspectors belonging to the Katha Department left much to be desired.

Justice Rammohan Reddy made these oral observations when he was dealing with a case relating to transfer of khata of land adjacent to the Mallya Hospital on Mallya Road in Bangalore.

When the court was told that the khata of the land was transferred without following the rules stipulated in the Municipalities Act, Justice Reddy orally observed that in many cases relating to such disputes, the BBMP is the main “mischief monger.”

He said there would perhaps not be any dispute over the transfer of khata had both the parties been given notice. Instead, the BBMP had gone about its own way, changing the khata without following certain procedures.

Justice Reddy further orally observed that Revenue Inspectors (of the BBMP) went around giving opinions and findings on khata ownership though they are not competent to do so. Their job is to issue notice to the parties and enter a finding if there is a compromise. However, they misuse their office and even decide on ownership, he said.

He regretted that though courts had consistently depreciated such conduct, Revenue Inspectors continued to flout not only court directions but also rules. He suggested to the BBMP advocate that orientation course could be held at regular intervals to Revenue Inspectors so that they could realise their rights and duties.

He said such courses would have to be held at least once in six months as Revenue Inspectors would have to be repeatedly told about rules and regulations governing khata transfer. He recalled that the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) had started refresher and orientation course for its employees and that such courses had helped the employees discharge their duties better.

He said it is unfortunate that counsel for BBMP is not present in court. He warned the BBMP that he would summon the BBMP Commissioner to personally offer his explanation in the case if the BBMP counsel failed to turn up.

Justice Reddy adjourned further hearing on the case.