Allowed

Smt. Geeta W/O Ashok Tubachi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Feb 2023WP/100032/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition for directions to consider their representations dated 06.11.2015 regarding land acquisition compensation and allotment of residential plots. The Court directed respondents to consider the representations and pass an appropriate order within three months, and dismissed the writ.

What did the court decide?

Undertaking was given to consider the petitioners' representations dated 06.11.2015 and pass an appropriate order within three months.

Smt. Geeta W/O Ashok Tubachi Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 100032 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 100032 OF 2017 (LA-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. GEETA W/O ASHOK TUBACHI AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O: YAMAKANMARDI NOW AT PLOT NO.2017, SECTOR NO 9, NEELAKANTHESHWAR ROAD, OPPOSITE TO MAHESH COLLEGE, MAL MARUTI EXTENSION,

¶9

BELAGAVI-590016

¶10

SMT SUPARNA W/O SAHARANBASAPPA PATTANSHETTY AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O: YAMAKANMARDI NOW AT PLOT NO.2017, SECTOR NO 9, NEELAKANTHESHWAR ROAD, OPPOSITE TO MAHESH COLLEGE, MAL MARUTI EXTENSION, BELAGAVI-590016

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SMT. SUNANDA P PATIL.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HighCourt of Karnataka,Dharwad

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BULIDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560001

¶16

REGIIONAL COMMISSIONER BELAGAVI DIVISION, BELAGAVI - 590001

¶17

SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAQ,R and R) MAJOR IRRIGATION PROJECT, CLUD ROAD, BELAGAVI BELAGAVI - 590001

¶18

¶19

WP No. 100032 of 2017

¶20

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KNNL GRBC-2, HIDKAL DAM- 591107, TALUKA: HUKERI, DISTRICT: BELGAVI

¶21

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HIDKAL DAM- 591107, TALUKA: HUKERI, DISTRICT: BELGAVI

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. PRASHANT V.MOGALI, HCGP)

¶24

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONERS AS PER THE REPRESENTATION DATED:06.11.2015 PRODUCED AT ANNECURE-'B' AND 'B1' RESPECTIVELY & ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

ORDER

¶27

In this writ petition, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:

¶28

“(i) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing respondents 3 to 5 to consider the case of the petitioners as per the representation dated 06.11.2015 produced at Annexures-B and B1 respectively.

¶29

(ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus whereby directing the respondents to grant

¶30

¶31

WP No. 100032 of 2017

¶32

compensation with statutory benefits with notice to them under Section 12(2) of L.A.Act and allot residential plots which they are legally entitled for in the interest of justice and equity.

¶33

(iii) Issue any other writ or direction or order the petitioners are found entitled to. and further relief as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and just in the ends of justice.”

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶35

It is the grievance of the petitioners that their representations dated 06.11.2015 at Annexures- B and B1 respectively, submitted to the respondents have not been considered so far by them nor any order has been passed on the same. Under these circumstances, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶36

Per contra , learned HCGP for the respondents submits that if reasonable time is given, they would

¶37

¶38

WP No. 100032 of 2017

¶39

consider and pass necessary order on the said

¶40

representations.

¶41

In view of the aforesaid facts and

¶42

circumstances and rival submissions, the concerned respondents are hereby directed to address the grievance of the petitioners and consider their representations dated 06.11.2015 at Annexures- B and B1 respectively and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶43

With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SRL

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 106

Smt. Geeta W/O Ashok Tubachi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Geeta W/O Ashok Tubachi 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

Basanagouda Shivanagouda Siddapur Vs the Government of India

Rajani Gaded D/O. Devendrappa W/O. Abhay Kadolkar Vs the State of Karnataka

Jayaram Angadi S/O Veerupaksha Angadi Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri. Kandi Rami Reddy S/O Kandi Dodda Timma Reddy Vs Sri. P. Nagi Reddy S/O Polike Venkataramanappa

Mallanagouda Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Manjamma W/O Burunagouda Bhangi Vs Pragati Gramin Bank