The court referred to a coordinate bench observation regarding alternate site allotment. Respondents agreed to consider the petitioner's representation and instructions for allotment were promised within three months.
Respondents instructed to consider petitioner's representation for alternate site allotment within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 1225 OF 2023 (LA-BDA)
BETWEEN:
SMT. B UMA, W/O LATE T R KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO. 246, 7TH MAIN ROAD, KSRTC LAYOUT, J P NAGAR, PHASE -2, BENGALURU -560 078.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUNDARESH H C.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. C V KIRAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)
WP No. 1225 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DTD 10.03.2014, 12.08.2017 AND 27.12.2019 AS PER ANNEXURE-G, G1 AND G2 RESPECTIVELY FOR ALLOTMENT ALTERNATIVE SITES IN LIEU OF ACQUISITION OF PETITIONERS REVENUE SITE SITUATED AT GIDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE FOR THE PURPOSE OF FORMATION OF SIR M V LAYOUT, PURSUANT TO INTIMATION LETTER BEARING NO.BDA/SLAO/05-06ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE- E.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The short grievance of the Petitioner is as to nonconsideration of his request for allotment of alternate site since his revenue site has been acquired for the formation of Sir.M.Visveswaraya Layout and in the light of observations of Coordinate Bench in JUNJAMMA VS. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , ILR 2005 KAR 608;
WP No. 1225 of 2023
vehemently argues that the name of his client has already been enlisted for this benefit and despite that the file is not moving for the reasons best known to the authorities that be. Learned AGA appearing for the 1st respondent on request and Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the other respondents again on request, although initially opposed the Petition tooth & nail, they now graciously agree to instruct their clients to look into the grievance of the Petitioner in the light of the material already produced by the Petitioner at Annexures-E & F, namely: the notice dated NIL and list of names for grant of benefit. This gesture coming from the State & its instrumentalities is really appreciable.
In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed off, costs having been made easy. The entire task as undertaken by Respondents shall be accomplished within a period of three months, all contentions being kept open.
WP No. 1225 of 2023
It is open to the answering Respondent to solicit any information/documents from the side of the Petitioner for due consideration of his Representation. However, in the guise of such solicitation, no delay shall be brooked.
Sd/JUDGE
CBC
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to alternative site in lieu of acquired revenue site for layout formation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Junjamma vs. Bangalore Development AuthorityReferred¶23
JUNJAMMA VS. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ILR 2005 KAR 608 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. B Uma
The State of Karnataka
The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority
The Special Land Acquisiton Officer, Bangalore Development Authority
Krishna S Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
