Disposed

Mahesh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Aug 2022WP/8472/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to Deputy and Assistant Commissioners to expedite decision on representations for alternative land. Bench directed authorities to consider additional representation and pass orders within three months before disposing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondents to consider petitioner's additional representation and pass appropriate orders within three months.

Mahesh Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 8472 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 8472 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MAHESH S/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, PERMANENT R/O KENKERE VILLAGE, HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572123

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR PATEL, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANASOUDHA, BENGALURU -560001

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMAKURU- 572 101

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MINI VIDHANSOUDHA TUMAKURU SUB-DIV. TUMAKURU -572101

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTION TO R2 AND 3 TO EXPEDITE DECISION ON THE REPRESENTATIONS, DTD 07.12.2019, VIDE ANNEXURES-A & B AND ETC.

¶20

¶21

WP No. 8472 of 2022

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶25

The prayer in the writ petition is to direct the respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Tumakuru District and the Assistant Commissioner, Tumakuru Sub-Division to consider the representations dated 07.12.2019 given by the petitioner to expeditiously consider the grievance of the petitioner, who is said to be grandson of the land losers on account of acquisition made by the respondentState Government for the purpose of construction of Tank known as “Muthurayanakere”. However, although, it was promised by the respondent-State Government that if the land losers do not seek compensation, alternative lands will be granted to them, till date alternative lands are not granted. In this regard, representations have been made by the petitioner.

¶26

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would also draw

¶27

the attention of this Court to an order dated 06.06.2022

¶28

¶29

WP No. 8472 of 2022

¶30

passed in W.P.No.8586/2022, under similar circumstances. This Court finds that a co-ordinate Bench directed the respondent authorities to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶31

Consequently, the petitioner is also permitted to file an additional representation reiterating the request with supporting documents, if any. On such representation being made, respondents No.2 and 3 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶32

With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Mahesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh 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

Haneef Sab Vs the Tahsildar

Shri Gange Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs. Muneera Begum Vs Government of Karnataka

Muneppa @Moogappa Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Sri G P Basavarajappa Vs the Principal Secretary

Ramachandra Vs the Tahsildar and Secretary