Allowed

Smt Varadamma v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC27 Oct 2021WP/6108/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner sought a direction for the BDA to consider applications submitted by her deceased mother for an alternative site after land acquisition. The court directed the authorities to consider the applications and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months.

What did the court decide?

Directing Respondents 2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's applications dated 09.01.2007, 24.08.2009, and 04.06.2015 and pass appropriate orders; petitioner to produce relevant documents within three

Smt Varadamma Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK.S.KINAGI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.6108 OF 2019 (LA-BDA)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

SMT.VARADAMMA, W/O LATE VADIVELU, SINCE DEAD BY HER LRs.

¶8

SRI.PUNGAVANA, S/O LATE VADIVELU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.D-72, JANATHA COLONY, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560023

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.SURESH.P, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001

¶13

THE BENGLAURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU-560020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER

¶14

¶15

THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BENGALURU-560020

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT.H.C.KAVITHA, HCGP FOR R1, SRI.M.N.RAMANJANEYA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER FOR ALLOTMENT OF AN ALTERNATIVE SITE IN TERMS OF HER APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER MOTHER DATED 09.01.2007, 24.08.2009 AND 04.06.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, B AND C DIRECTING R-2 AND 3 AUTHORITIES.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a mandamus directing respondent No.2 to consider the request of the petitioner for allotment of an alternative site in terms of her application submitted by the petitioner's mother dated 09.01.2007, 24.08.2009 and 04.06.2015 vide Annexures 'A', 'B' & 'C' respectively.

¶22

Brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition are that:

¶23

¶24

The mother of the petitioner has purchased the property bearing site No.1 situated at Ullal Village, Yashwanthpur Hobli from one Sri Y.R.Shivaramakka w/o Y.T.Rangaswamy for valuable consideration. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 acquired the land bearing Sy.No.95 of Ullala Village. The said site purchased by the mother of the petitioner was situated in the said survey number. The petitioner gave a representation seeking for an alternative site on 09.01.2007, 24.08.2009 and 04.06.2015 vide Annexures 'A', 'B' & 'C' respectively. The respondent authorities have not considered the representation submitted by the petitioner till this day. Hence, this petition.

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶26

Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that if reasonable time is granted to respondent Nos.2 and 3, respondent Nos.2 and 3 will consider the application submitted by the petitioner.

¶27

¶28

5. His submission is placed on record.

¶29

The writ petition is allowed.

¶30

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 09.01.2007, 24.08.2009 and 04.06.2015 vide Annexures 'A', 'B' & 'C' respectively and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶31

Further, the petitioner is directed to produce all the relevant documents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

ssb

Smt Varadamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Varadamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Dasegowda Vs the Project Director

Smt Hemavathy Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Zafer Iqbal Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Bhagyamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Lingappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Keshavamurthy K C Vs the State of Karnataka