Disposed

S Nagaraju v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Mar 2023WP/22063/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order disposes of a writ petition restraining the Bangalore Development Authority. The court rejects the plea for indefinite pendency and remits parties to a committee, keeping legal contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with liberty to approach Justice K.N.Keshavanarayana Committee; occupation not to be disturbed subject to committee's decision.

S Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 22063 of 2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 22063 OF 2014 (LA-BDA)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

S NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O SUBBAIAH, R/AT NO.320, TANK ROAD, JAKKUR VILLAGE, JAKKUR-POST, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE 560 064.

¶10

N.SUNDHEER, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O NAGARAJU, R/AT NO.320, TANK ROAD, JAKKUR VILLAGE, JAKKUR-POST, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE 560 064.

¶11

Digitally

¶12

signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI. C M NAGABUSHANA.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPT. OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560 001. REPT BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶17

THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARAPARK WEST, BANGALORE 560 020. REPTD. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶18

¶19

WP No. 22063 of 2014

¶20

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARAPARK WEST, BANGALORE 560 020.

¶21

SRI. SHAMANNA, S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 76, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, AMARJYOTHI LAYOUT, CHOLANAGAR, BANGALORE 560 032.

¶22

SRI. SEERANNA, S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 314, 9^TH A CROSS, JAKKUR (POST), BANGALORE 560 064.

¶23

SRI. APPANNA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, S/O LATE JALADA SUBBAIAH, RESIDING AT NO.314, 9^TH A CROSS, JAKKUR (POST), BANGALORE 560 064.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI.R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1; SRI.K KRISHNA.,ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI. SARAVANA S, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO RESTRAIN THE R-2 IN ANY WAY MEDDLING OR CANCELLING OR DOING ANY OTHER ACT IN RESPECT OF THE SALE DEED DATED 1.1.2013 AT ANN-D AND ETC.,

¶27

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

¶28

3 - WP No. 22063 of 2014

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The subject matter of this Writ Petition is substantially similar to the one in W.P.No.51929/2014 and Connected Matters, between K.P.ANJANAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS, disposed off, by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 27.09.2021, granting some reprieve to the litigants therein. Learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that the Petitioners be given liberty to approach the Hon’ble Justice K.N.Keshavanarayana Committee for redressal of their grievance, in accordance with law.

¶31

The vehement submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Coordinate Bench had directed for awaiting the decision of the Apex Court in a SLP and therefore, this case may not be disposed off, does not merit acceptance since this Court indefinitely cannot await the decision making in the pending SLP. This apart, in a series of matters, the litigants are relegated to the Committee and therefore, there is no reasons to give a

¶32

¶33

WP No. 22063 of 2014

¶34

preferential treatment to the Petitioners by keeping their

¶35

case alone pending.

¶36

Ordered accordingly & Writ Petitions are disposed off, all contentions having been kept open.

¶37

The occupation of the parties in the subject sites shall not be disturbed till after and subject to the outcome of decision of the Hon’ble Justice K.N.Keshavanarayana Committee.

¶38

No costs.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

Snb/

S Nagaraju v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S Nagaraju v. the 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

M/S Kempegowda Rural House Building Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Kempegowda Rural House Building Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. T M Narayanaswamy Vs the Principal Secretary

Gopal S Vs Bangalore Development Authority

Smt. Manjulamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.M.R. Chandrashekar, Vs Sri.Rudrappa