Disposed

Sri C Praveen Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Apr 2022WP/4369/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two writ petitions filed by residents seeking allotment of MIG sites. Relying on a 2011 precedent, the Court held that directions for G-category allotments are no longer applicable, granting only liberty to apply for sites in future notifications based on seniority.

What did the court decide?

The petitions disposed of with liberty to petitioners to seek allotment of sites based on seniority when future notifications are issued.

Sri C Praveen Kumar Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 04^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.4369/2020 (BDA) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.2802/2021 (BDA)

¶6

IN WRIT PETITION NO.4369/2020

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

1 . SRI C PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O CHANNAREDDY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT 269 3^RD CROSS,

¶9

1^ST MAIN ROAD, CHOKKASANDRA LAYOUT, KORAMANGALA 1^ST BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 034

¶10

2 . SRI SIDDEGOWDA S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT 223 1^ST B CROSS, 3^RD STAGE, 4^TH BLOCK, BASAVESHWARANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 079

¶11

3 . SRI P CHENNAREDDY S/O PILLAREDDY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT 23/1, 4TH MAIN ROAD

¶12

JAI BHEEMANAGAR 17TH CROSS, B T M LAYOUT 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 068

¶13

¶14

4 . SRI P NAGARATHNA W/O LATE PAPAREDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT 23/1 4^TH MAIN ROAD, JAI BHEEMANAGAR 17^TH CROSS, B T M LAYOUT, 1^ST STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 068 ... PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE) AND :

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARAPARK WEST CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.SESHU, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS DATED 01.01.2020 VIDE ANNX-C1 TO C4 AND ALLOT THE AVAILABLE VACANT MIG SITES IN BTM OR HSR LAYOUT AS PER THE SENIORITY LIST OF ALLOTMENTS.

¶18

¶19

IN WRIT PETITION NO.2802/2021

¶20

BETWEEN :

¶21

1 . NAVEEN KUMAR C S/O CHENNAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT 23/1, 4TH CROSS, 17TH MAIN ROAD, JAI BHEEMANAGAR, BTM LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU 560068

¶22

1. SRI BOGEGOWDA S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT 78, 1ST FLOOR, JARAKABANDE KAVAL, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU 560096

¶23

SMT SAKAMMA W/O LATE VENKATEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO 223, 1ST G CROSS, 3RD STAGE, 4TH BLOCK, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, BENGALURU 560079

¶24

SRI SHIVANNA S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 44 YERS, NO 78/A, 1ST MAIN ROAD, JARAKABANDE KAVAL, 1ST MAIN RAOD, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU 560096

¶25

(BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE)

... PETITIONERS

AND :

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001

¶30

THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARAPARK WEST, CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU 560020

¶31

... RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. V.SESHU, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS DATED 22.06.2019 VIDE ANENXRUE-E1 TO E4 DIRECTING THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS AND ALLOT THE VACANT MIG SITE AVAILABLE IN HSR LAYOUT OF BTM LAYOUT FORMED BY THE R-2 AND AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT

¶34

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

¶36

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶37

The petitioners who are similarly placed have filed these petitions for directions to the Bengaluru Development Authority to consider their respective representations. It is submitted that the petitioners are similarly placed in view of the fact that they rely upon certain Circulars for grant of sites under ‘G’ category.

¶38

However, it is undisputed that the question of allotment of sites under ‘G’ category is no longer res integra with the decision of this Court in K.Raju Vs. Bengaluru Development Authority reported in ILR 2011 KAR 120 . In fact, it is undisputed that after the aforesaid decision, similar petitions have been disposed of by this Court holding that directions for consideration of representations for allotment of site under ‘G’ category would not arise but with liberty to the petitioners to seek for allotment in the light of the Rules

¶39

¶40

for the allotment of sites based on their seniority. A copy of the order of this Court in W.P.Nos.22690-93/2018 (BDA) dated 20.09.2018 is placed on record.

¶41

Perused the orders, and the only relief that could be granted to the petitioners is that as and when notifications are issued inviting applications, they may be at liberty to seek allotment of sites based on their seniority as contemplated under the relevant Rules. The petitions stand disposed of with such liberty to the petitioners.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

Sri C Praveen Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri C Praveen Kumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Manukuppe Chikkavenkataiah Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Rathnamma Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M/S. Sri Giri Bar and Restaurant Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Raviprakash Rathod Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Chandramma Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

Sri K Raghavendra Vs the State of Karnataka