Remanded

Smt Gangalakshmamma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Oct 2023WP/22529/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged allotment letters issued by the BDA alleging boundary errors based on land not fully acquired. The High Court directed the BDA to rectify the allotment letters by considering specific representations and internal sketches within eight weeks and remanded the matter for appearance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to appear; BDA to consider representations at Annexure-L and rectify allotment letters considering sketch at Annexure-M within eight weeks.

Smt Gangalakshmamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 22529 OF 2023 (LA-BDA)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. GANGALAKSHMAMMA WIFE OF LATE GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

¶9

SMT. NEELAMMA G., DAUGHTER OF LATE GANGANNA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

¶10

SRI RAVI KUMAR G., SON OF LATE GANGANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SRI. JAYARAM G., SON OF LATE GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 229 MUDDAYYANAPALYA VISWANEEDAM POST SIR M. VISHVESHWARAIAH LAYOUT 7TH BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 091. …PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. ABHINAY Y.T., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T N VISWANATHA.,ADVOCATES)

¶14

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS ADDL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, NO 85/A, DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, SAMPANGIRAMANAGARA, BENGALURU- 560 001.

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶18

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (LA) BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶19

THE DEPUTY SECRETARY - I BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶20

TOWN PLANNING MEMBER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶21

THE DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶22

THE JOINT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶24

THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶25

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEST DIVISION VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 040.

¶26

THE ASST EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WEST DIVISION VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 040.

¶27

SRI SATHISH B K SON OF LATE B S KESHAVAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 224/A, 37TH CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 010.

¶28

SRI G.S. MANJUNATH SON OF SHRI G.S. SIDDHARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 219, 2ND STAGE, NEETHI MARG, SIDDHARTHA LAYOUT MYSORE - 570 011.

¶29

SMT .D. KALAVATHI WIFE OF SRI S. MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT INDIAN NAVAL HOSPITAL SHEET, NEAR R.C CHURCH,

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶31

COLABA MUMBAI - 400 005.

¶32

SMT. SHARADA K RAO WIFE OF U.N. KRISHNARAO , AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 20, ASHTAGRAM, LAYOUT NO 01, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BENGALURU - 560 079.

¶33

SMT YELLAMMA WIFE OF LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, RESIDING AT ULLALU BASATHI, ULLALU UPANAGARA POST, YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 056.

¶34

SMT PUSHPA RAVIPRAKASH WIFE OF SRI, RAVIPRAKASH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT CARE OF GOROORU KRISHNA IYENGAR HASSAN DISTRICT.

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SRI. LAGALI HANUMANTHARAYAPPA AGA FOR R1; SRI. B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R10; NOTICE TO R11 TO R16 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED:09.10.2023 IN TERMS OF MEMO)

¶37

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ALLOTMENT LETTERS DATED 07/04/2023 ISSUED BY THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AT ANNEXURE-F BEARING NO.BDA/DS-I/2200/1/BLK-V/SMVL/2003-04, ANNEXURE-G BEARING NO.BDA/DS-I/2200/2/BLK-V/SMVL/2003-04, ANNEXURE-H BEARING NO.BDA/DS-I/2200/3/BLKV/SMVL/2003-04 ANNEXURE-J BEARING NO.BDA/DSI/2200/4/BLK-V/SMVL/2003-04 AND ALLOTMENT LETTER DATED 06/08/2007 VIDE ANNEXURES-K, BEARING

¶38

¶39

NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶40

NO.BDA/DS-I/2200/5/BLK-V/SMVL/2007-08 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND ETC.

¶41

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

¶42

ORDER

¶43

Heard Sri. Abhinay Y.T. learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Lagali Hanumantharayappa, learned AGA for respondent no.1 and Sri.B.S.Karthikeyan, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 10.

¶44

It is the case of the petitioners that they were the owners of land bearing Sy.No.131 measuring 5 acres 12 guntas situated at Hullalu village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. That in terms of the preliminary notification dated 15.4.2002 and followed by the final notification dated 31.10.2002, respondents-BDA acquired the said land for the purpose of formation of Vishweshwaraiah layout II stage. That though 5 acres 12 guntas of land was notified in the preliminary notification, the respondents-BDA have acquired land only to an extent

¶45

¶46

NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶47

of 4 acres in the Final Notification and remaining land was not acquired.

¶48

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners drawing attention of this court to Annexure-M a sketch prepared by the respondents-BDA submits that notings in the said sketch reveal that land to an extent of 6.5 guntas have been utilized for the purpose of formation of road and remaining 13.5 guntas of land has not been acquired and the same has been in possession and enjoyment of the petitioners.

¶49

Learned counsel for the petitioners further drawing attention of this court to letter of allotments and possession certificates produced at Annexures-F to K1 submits that despite the respondents-authority taking note of the extent of property measuring 13.5 guntas being in possession of the petitioners, and giving specific boundaries/description in the said sketch have proceeded

¶50

to give description of the sites as per Annexure-F to Annexure-K1 contrary to the factual position of the matter.

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶53

In that, he submits that wrong boundaries have been mentioned in the allotment letters issued in favour of the private respondents and private respondents taking undue advantage of the same are claiming property which even according to the respondents-BDA has not been acquired. In the light of the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter, he submits that petitioners had made representations as per Annexure-L series seeking cancellation of allotment letters issued in favour of the private respondents. Since the said representations have not been considered by the respondents-BDA in rectifying the error found in the allotment letters, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶54

Since the petitioners are seeking direction to

¶55

the respondents-BDA to consider the representations at Annexure-L series in rectifying the boundaries given in the allotment letters, without going to the merits or otherwise of the contention raised by the petitioners, this Court is of

¶56

the considered view that petition be disposed of directing the respondents-authorities to consider the

¶57

NC: 2023:KHC:36634 WP No. 22529 of 2023

¶58

¶59

representations taking into account the sketch produced at Annexure-M which is stated to have been prepared by the respondents-BDA, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Till consideration of the said representation, respondents-BDA shall not precipitate the matter. Since the petitioners are present before this court, they are directed to be appear before respondents-BDA on 25.10.2023 at 11.00 a.m. without any further notice.

¶60

All contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶61

With the above observation, writ petition is disposed

¶62

of.

¶63

Sd/JUDGE

¶64

Smt Gangalakshmamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gangalakshmamma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddalingaiah @ Siddalinge Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mallesh Vs State of Karnataka

Ms H C Meena Rani Vs the Commissioner

Sri I M Omkar Vs State of Karnataka

K Ramesh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri K N Shivashankar Vs State of Karnataka