Petitioner challenged an auction notification via writ petition. Court directed Respondent No.2 to consider the petitioner's representation within four months. Court stated no opinion on merits.
Respondent No.2 directed to consider the representation dated 03.02.2022 within four months from receipt of certified copy of this order.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:51230 WP No. 3450 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 3450 OF 2022 (BDA)
Between:
Sri Abdul Jameel S/o Late Mohammed Inayathulla Aged about 52 years R/at No.27, 1st Cross, Oop. Tolgate, Next to Gopalan Mall, Bengaluru - 560026.
…Petitioner
(By Sri Manjunatha S.V., Advocate)
And:
Bengaluru Development Authority T.Chowdaiah Road, Kumara Park (W) Bengaluru-560020.
Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…Respondents
(By Sri Ajay Kumar M., Advocate for R1 and R2)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned Auction Notification dated 31.01.2022 in respect of the commercial shop No.4 in the first floor, situated at Commercial Complex Valagerahalli, Bangalore, measuring 142.3 Sq.Mtrs vide Annexure - A issued by the respondent No.1 and etc.
This Writ Petition, coming on for preliminary hearing in 'B' Group, this day, order was made therein as under:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
the petitioner is not pressing prayer (a) as he contended that prayer (a) has become infructuous. Nextly, the grievance of the petitioner is that he has participated in the auction proceedings and accordingly sought for direction for respondent no.2 to consider the representation dated 03.02.2022 (Annexure ‘F’ to the writ petition). Having taken note of the contents in the representation dated 03.02.2022, respondent no.2 is directed to consider the same within four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the case.
Sd/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE
SD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a direction is appropriate for the Respondent No.2 to consider the petitioner's representation regarding auction proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abdul Jameel
The Commissioner, Bengaluru Development Authority
The Financial Member, Bengaluru Development Authority
E.S.INDIRESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
