Bengaluru: For 85-year-old SM Mallaiah, the battle to remove encroachments blocking access to the main road from his house has not ended even after 28 years.During this time, encroachments that were small sheds have now become a permanent multi-storey commercial building, rising higher than his own house.The property was allocated to the state govt employee in 1987 in a newly formed Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) layout on 4th A Main Road, 4th Block, Basaveshwarnagar. The 4th A Main Road, along which his house was located, was linked to Magadi Main Road, according to BDA’s layout plan.After paying Rs 19,950, he was issued a possession certificate on Aug 8, 1988, which showed a road on its western boundary. He then built a house on the site, following which the “revenue site holders”, who had earlier occupied the land, allegedly encroached on the road and put up sheds, blocking his access. Mallaiah alleged they also cut his electricity connection and destroyed underground sewage pipes.Mallaiah told TOI that BDA’s engineering section did not take any action to evict the trespassers.While he got the property allocated when he was in his mid-40s, he spent decades knocking on the doors of courts, consumer forums and a redressal committee for a path less than 100 metres long to be reclaimed.Till 2010, Mallaiah used to regularly follow up on the matter with BDA head office, but then his health started deteriorating, which eventually made him bedridden. Over the last decade, his 56-year-old son BM Paramesh has taken up the matter, visiting BDA’s engineering section regularly.“Due to his disability and old age, he stopped personal visits almost a decade ago, but he still didn’t give up and used to send petitions through me to BDA officials. But the situation around our house has now become worse. In 2021, the encroachers started constructing over the road permanently,” Paramesh said.In Oct this year, Paramesh got slight relief when the district consumer commission issued a non-bailable warrant against the BDA commissioner through the city police commissioner.Paramesh believes that the family spent more than Rs 5 lakh over the decades on the case. During that time, he lost his mother.Legal battleMallaiah’s fight for access to the road began in 1998, when Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum ruled in his favour.Mallaiah filed criminal complaints against encroachers while they resorted to counter-complaints against him and his family. While the complainant claimed BDA assured him it would restore the road as per a high court order, it took no steps. Alleging deficiency in service, he later approached the consumer forum seeking a direction to BDA to form the road, besides compensation.In its defence, BDA argued that Mallaiah was not a consumer and the forum had no jurisdiction. It said the relief sought was in the nature of a mandatory injunction that could not be issued. It added that it had been prevented by court orders from clearing the road, as the high court had directed that the encroachers’ applications be considered by a screening committee.The consumer forum noted that the screening committee had rejected the encroachers’ claims on March 31, 1997. With no impediment left, it said, BDA, which has a task force and demolition squad, “can have no more excuse for dithering.”On June 16, 1998, the forum directed BDA to remove all obstructions and encroachments within four months and restore the road to its original condition. If BDA failed, it would have to pay him Rs 50 per day after four months until the obstruction was removed.We will solve it: BDABDA officials told TOI that the authority would only file for a bail hearing, as it cannot appear in court without knowing the case. The authority would seek the next date and, in the meantime, go through the file to see the status. Though the commissioner through a non-bailable warrant was supposed to appear Friday, he did not appear. The case was adjourned to Dec 4.Officials said they would approach the complainant and solve the issue.BDA commissioner P Manivannan said that if required, he would personally appear before the court: “We are not aware of the details of the case as the summons arrived suddenly. It recently came to my notice, but only through other officials. If someone complains, necessary action has to be taken. Our legal department will take care of it.”No action yet: Complainant’s sonDuring an open house meeting in April this year, Paramesh directly addressed his grievance to BDA chairman NA Haris. “Despite Mr Haris directing the zonal commissioner (west) to take immediate action and remove encroachments from the road, the engineering section said they wanted approval from the legal section. But till today nothing has happened,” he said.
