Disposed

Sri Lakshminarayana v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2024WP/17169/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regularization of a dwelling house constructed on land under BDA acquisition. Counsel for BDA undertook to consider the representation; the Court disposed of the petition directing BDA to decide within four weeks and communicate the decision, maintaining status quo meanwhile.

What did the court decide?

Direction to BDA to consider the petitioner's representation within four weeks and communicate decision; interim status quo qua the property.

Sri Lakshminarayana Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:41515-DB WP No. 17169 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 17169 OF 2024 (LA-BDA)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH, R/AT 121/94 (63),

¶11

KALATHAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIVAKOTE, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 089.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. PARIKSHIT S.S., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶17

BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (BDA), T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶18

THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (BDA),

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:41515-DB WP No. 17169 of 2024

¶21

T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 020.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI.M.RAJAKUMAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI.SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND 3)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER (ANNEXURE - K) AND REGULARISE THE DWELLING HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NO.121/94 SITUATED IN KALATHAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASAGHATTAPURA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SHIVAKOTE, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU560089 AND ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶29

The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction by

¶30

issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to consider his representation/application to regularize the dwelling house.

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41515-DB WP No. 17169 of 2024

¶32

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Parikshit S.S., appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.M.Rajakumar, appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned counsel Sri.Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶33

It is the claim of the petitioner that he has constructed a house in the site, as depicted in the schedule, in the year 2008, and has produced several documents to buttress the ownership. It is the further submission that the Committee so constituted by the Apex Court headed by Mr.Justice A.V. Chandrashekar has protected identical properties and also directed issuance of regularization certificate. Therefore, he is seeking the same prayer.

¶34

Learned counsel appearing for the Bangalore Development Authority Sri. Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar submits that if reasonable time is granted, the representation/application of the petitioner will be considered, in accordance with law and necessary orders would be passed.

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41515-DB WP No. 17169 of 2024

¶36

In the light of the said submission and the prayer being innocuous, we deem it appropriate to dispose the petition with a direction to the Bangalore Development Authority to consider the representation, within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken to the petitioner.

¶37

6. Till consideration of the representation takes place

¶38

at the hands of the Bangalore Development Authority, status-quo, qua the property be maintained by the parties.

¶39

With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed.

¶40

Sd/(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

¶41

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶42

SJK

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Sri Lakshminarayana v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Lakshminarayana 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

Sri. Manjunatha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri H Nataraja Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Chandrashekar R Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri a Govindaraj Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Suresh B R Vs State of Karnataka

Smt.M. Varalakshmi Alias Nalina Vs the Bangalore Development Authority