Disposed

Sri M Mahadeva v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Nov 2022WP/1682/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order in a writ petition seeking allotment of land for an LPG Godown. The court disposed of the petition as not surviving after the Government rejected the representation via a notification dated 24.09.2021, reserving liberty to challenge that order.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to challenge the Government order dated 24.09.2021.

Sri M Mahadeva Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 1682 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 1682 OF 2018 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI M MAHADEVA S/O. C M MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO. 37, 24^TH MAIN, PUTTENAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560078.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. M KRISHNA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560001. REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001. (REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY)

¶15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, KANDAYA BHAWAN, BANGALORE 560009.

¶16

THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,

¶17

¶18

WP No. 1682 of 2018

¶19

KANDAYA BHAWAN, GROUND FLOOR, K G ROAD BANGALORE 560009.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. GOVT ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4.,ADVOCATE)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO FINALIZE THE ALLOTMENT AND LEASING THE PROPOSE LAND OF 0-35 GUNTAS AT SURVEY NO-8 VADDARAPALYA, HOSAKEREHALLI, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE FORTHWITH AT THE EARLIEST BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURES-L, M, N, P IN ACCORDANCE WITH LASW AS PER ANNEXURE - K DATED:-05/05/2004.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶26

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for

¶27

following reliefs:-

¶28

“Wherefore, the petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ in the same nature, directing the respondent to finalize the allotment and leasing the proposed land of 0.35 guntas at Survey No.8, Vaddarapalya, Hosakerehalli, Uttarahalli, Hobli, Bengaluru forth with at the

¶29

¶30

WP No. 1682 of 2018

¶31

earliest by considering the representations submitted by the petitioner as per Annexures-L, M, N and P in accordance with law as per Annexure-K dated 05.05.2004 and

¶32

b) Pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of equity and justice.”

¶33

Brief facts of the petition are that, the petitioner claims to be rewarded with prestigious awards as mentioned in

¶34

the paragraph 1 to 3 of the writ petition. The petitioner is carrying on business of small Gas Distribution Agency in the vicinity of the Puttenhalli, JP Nagar, Bangalore. The petitioner made an application to the respondent-Government, seeking land for establishing the LPG Godown to place gas cylinders, and accordingly, the petitioner has approached this court seeking relief of issuing writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to finalize proposed land to an extent of 0.35 guntas of land in Survey No.8 of Vaddarapalya village, Hosakerehalli, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore, as per Annexure-D to the writ petition.

¶35

¶36

WP No. 1682 of 2018

¶37

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the notification dated 24.09.2021, whereby, the respondent-Government has rejected the representation made by he petitioner as per order Government Order dated 24.09.2021. Hence, I am of the view that the writ petition does not survive for consideration and accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the said Government order dated 24.09.2021, if so advised.

¶38

SD/JUDGE

¶39

¶40

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Sri M Mahadeva v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M Mahadeva 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 K S Narasimha Murthy Vs Chief Manager

Sri Malleshwara Proudha Shaale Vs the State of Karantaka

Sri Cheluva Bhovi Vs the Registrar of Society

Lalitha Nursing School Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri H M Santhosh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Raamanath Hegde Vs the National Co-Operative Bank Limited