WP/2800/2026 of THE RAJAJINAGAR 5TH BLOCK RESIDENCE WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs THE CHIEF SECRETARY on 24 September 2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 4 to 8, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.2/National Public School, as well as learned counsel appearing for respondent No.11/Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

2. The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus by directing the respondent No.2 to consider the request made by the petitioner which has been marked as Annexure- D dated: 23.01.2023.

ii)

Issue

writ of mandamus to the respondents 1 and 3 to 11 to take serious action against the 2nd respondent causing inconvenience nuisance and causing health hazard by stopping traffic jam in parking vehicles in front of the house of petitioners and also take serious action the 2nd respondent school is running in buffer zone of

HC-KAR

Rajkaluve to stop the above said illegal act by the 2nd respondent school.

ii) Such other discretion or order as made deem fit to this Hon'ble Court may kindly be issued.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, apart from the traffic jam created by the illegal act of parking school buses, as well as the vehicles of the teachers and parents in the residential area, there is also a complaint with regard to the noise pollution caused by the school, especially by the use of loudspeakers.

4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 would contend that the School has been functioning since the year 1959 and the residential layout has come into existence much later. It is clearly stated that no bus belonging to the School is being parked in the residential area. It is further submitted that, in respect of the buses which are coming to bring children to the School, the operators of such buses have been specifically instructed not to park their vehicles in the residential area.

HC-KAR

5. It is also submitted that, for the past three or four months, there has been no such complaint and that the police are taking necessary action to see that such illegal parking is not carried out. It is further contended that the School is situated on a civic amenity site earmarked for educational use and has obtained the requisite approvals and sanctioned building plan. It is specifically denied that any school building has been constructed over the Rajakaluve or in violation of the applicable buffer norms. It is submitted that the playground over the storm water drain was established with the permission of the competent authority and does not obstruct the flow of water.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 4 to 8 would also submit that the police are taking necessary steps to see that the buses are not being parked in the residential area, thereby creating nuisance to the residents of the area.

HC-KAR

7. It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.11/Karnataka State Pollution Control Board that no complaint with regard to noise pollution or any other pollution has been submitted before the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.

8. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 would also submit that loudspeakers are used only for the morning assembly and that generators, if any, are used only during power cuts and there is no sound pollution as alleged.

9. Having considered the contentions advanced, we are of the opinion that, in view of the submissions made by the respondent No.2 as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 4 to 8, the grievances raised by the petitioner have been considerably reddressed. However, if there is any further complaint with regard to parking of vehicles in the residential area, it is for the petitioner to

HC-KAR

raise such contention before the jurisdictional police, who shall look into the matter and take necessary remedial steps at the earliest.

10. Further, in case the petitioner has any contention with regard to sound or other pollution by respondent No.2, it is for the petitioner to approach the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, which shall take necessary steps in accordance with law, after issuing notice to respondent No.2 as well.

11. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/- (T.P.VIVEKANANDA) JUDGE

SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14