<p>Abhaya, a residents’ welfare association member in Srininvasanagar, had contended that the then Corporation had designated three acres for the construction of a park. However, this area was occupied by people and the Karnataka Slum Clearance Board had identified the area as a slum.<br /><br />The petitioners sought the vacation of the slum, so that the area could be developed into a park. The Karnataka Slum Clearance Board assured the Court that 35 guntas of land was occupied by the slum dwellers and this area would be fenced. The Board submitted that it had already commenced construction to build houses for the slum dwellers and the hutments would be demolished later.<br /><br />A division bench comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice A S Bopanna directed the Board to remove all the hutments and to raise hygienic construction in one year’s time and to also fence the 35 guntas occupied by the slum dwellers. The remaining area of the three acres will be developed into a park.</p>
<p>Abhaya, a residents’ welfare association member in Srininvasanagar, had contended that the then Corporation had designated three acres for the construction of a park. However, this area was occupied by people and the Karnataka Slum Clearance Board had identified the area as a slum.<br /><br />The petitioners sought the vacation of the slum, so that the area could be developed into a park. The Karnataka Slum Clearance Board assured the Court that 35 guntas of land was occupied by the slum dwellers and this area would be fenced. The Board submitted that it had already commenced construction to build houses for the slum dwellers and the hutments would be demolished later.<br /><br />A division bench comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice A S Bopanna directed the Board to remove all the hutments and to raise hygienic construction in one year’s time and to also fence the 35 guntas occupied by the slum dwellers. The remaining area of the three acres will be developed into a park.</p>