Allowed

Mr S N Ravichandra v. M/S Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (Bbmp)

Karnataka HC27 Sept 2024WP/54908/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition compelling the BBMP to either issue a TDR certificate or pay compensation for four guntas of land acquired for road widening without notice and prior compensation. The court directed a two-month deadline for the respondents to decide on the relief.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to issue TDR for 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.20/4 or pay compensation under RLARR Act, 2013, within two months.

Mr S N Ravichandra Vs M/S Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 54908 OF 2017 (LB-BMP)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. S N RAVICHANDRA, S/O LATE MR. S NAGASUBRAMANIAN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.609, 11^TH CROSS, 5^TH MAIN, J P NAGAR 3^RD PHASE, BANGALORE-560 078.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI VIVEKANANDA H S, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by R DEEPA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

M/S. BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP), BOMMANAHALLI SUB-DIVISION, 9^TH FLOOR, JAYANAGAR 4^TH BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 011. REP. BY ITS ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER.

¶13

M/S. BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶14

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK, WEST BENGALURU-560 020. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. (AMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED 2/9/2024)

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI KARTHIKEYAN B S, ADVOCATE)

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶18

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO GRANT TDR CERTIFICATE TO THE PETITINOER AS PER THEIR LETTER DATED 05.12.2012 AT ANNEXURE-D, IN RESPECT OF 4 GUNTAS OF LAND IN SURVEY NO.20/4 AND TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ACT ON THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITINER DATED 28.10.2016 AT ANNEXURE-F AND ISSUE THE TDR WITHIN THE TIME-FRAME FIXED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for a mandamus directing the respondents to grant TDR certificate to him as per letter dated 05.12.2012 at Annexure-D in respect of 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.20/4 and to act on his representation dated 28.10.2016 at Annexure-F and to issue TDR within the time-frame fixed by this Court.

¶23

Brief facts leading rise to filing of this petition are as under:

¶24

The petitioner had purchased the land bearing Sy.No.20/4 to an extent of 20,000 square feet, situated in

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶26

Bilekahalli Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, by virtue of an absolute sale deed executed by Mr.Abbanna and others on 15.03.2007. Pursuant to the sale deed in favour of the petitioner, the concerned revenue authorities have carried out the necessary mutation in favour of the petitioner. The first respondent during the formation of an 80 feet road and underground box type storm water drain acquired an extent of 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.20/4 owned by the petitioner, without notice and compensation. Being aggrieved, the petitioner made a requisition on 27.05.2010 seeking for compensation and due to the absence of any reply/action, he filed a petition in W.P.No.15855/2011 before this Court and by an order dated 24.09.2012 the first respondent was directed to consider the representation of the petitioner. In compliance to the aforesaid Court order, the first respondent issued a letter to petitioner on 05.12.2012 acknowledging the petitioner's entitlement and sought for some documents, which was complied by the petitioner vide his representation dated 28.10.2016, with a request

¶27

¶28

NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶29

to grant TDR certificate for the acquired extent of land. The first respondent has failed to perform the statutory duties which they were duty bound to do and has neither issued the TDR certificate nor replied to the representation dated 28.10.2016 of the petitioner, due to which, the petitioner's right to hold property has been violated besides being victimized by the high-handed and whimsical action of the respondents who have acquired the land without payment of compensation, which is against the mandate of law, resulting in his right to hold and enjoy the property being jeopardized. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶30

Respondents have not filed any objections to

¶31

the writ petition.

¶32

Heard Sri.Vivekananda H.S., learned counsel for

¶33

the petitioner and Sri.Karthikeyan B.S., learned counsel for the respondents.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,

¶35

in identical matter, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶37

allowed the writ petition and he submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and further he also submits that the BBMP aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge, preferred a writ appeal in W.A.NO.450/2022. The said writ appeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 26.09.2022. The BBMP aggrieved by the order and judgment passed in the writ petition and writ appeal, respectively, preferred SLA No.21853/2022 before the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court dismissed the appeal filed by the BBMP vide order dated 25.07.2023. He submits that the petitioner is also entitled for similar benefit in this case. Hence prays to dispose of the writ petition in terms of the order passed in the case of DR. ARUN KUMAR B. C., VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS., reported in ILR 2022 KAR 1461 (W.P.NOS.9408/2020 & CONNECTED MATTERS) .

¶38

Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents

¶39

does not dispute that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by the

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶42

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of DR. ARUN KUMAR (SUPRA) , and submits that the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the same.

¶43

Perused the records and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶44

It is not in dispute that the petitioner had purchased an extent of the land in Sy.No.20/4 measuring 20,000 sqare feet from Mr.Abbanna and others and the first respondent acquired 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.20/4 owned by the petitioner for formation of 80 feet road and underground box type storm water drain, without notice and compensation and the petitioner issued a representation to the first respondent seeking compensation. Thereafter, the respondents having failed to act on the above representation, the petitioner filed a W.P.No.15855/20411 before this Court and the respondents were directed to consider the petitioner's representation. Pursuant to the same, the first respondent acknowledges that the petitioner is entitled for

¶45

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶46

compensation and requests certain documents to be produced and the petitioner replies to the above letter and undertakes to furnish all the documents sought for by the first respondent and thereafter, the petitioner makes a representation to the first respondent seeking for TDR for the acquired land along with furnishing all the documents.

¶47

The respondent Nos.1 and 2 cannot insist the petitioner No.1 to surrender the land free of cost. If at all if the respondent Nos.1 and 2 wants to widen the road, it has to acquire the land in accordance with law. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 insisting the petitioner to surrender the land for free of cost, is contrary to Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Further, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has already quashed the similar endorsement issued by the BBMP. The petitioner is also entitled for similar relief.

¶48

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:

¶49

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:40267 WP No. 54908 of 2017

¶50

ORDER

¶51

The writ petition is allowed.

¶52

The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to issue Transferable Development Rights for 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.20/4 which came to be acquired by the respondent No.1 for the road widening in accordance with law or in the alternative, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to pay the compensation for the land measuring 4 guntas in Sy.No.20/4, as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶53

The respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall take a decision as to whether respondent Nos.1 and 2 are willing to issue Transferable Development Rights (TDR) or initiate acquisition proceeding, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶54

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶55

NR/-

¶56

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Mr S N Ravichandra v. M/S Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (Bbmp)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr S N Ravichandra v. M/S Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (Bbmp)

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

Sri Manohar Das v Vs the Commissioner

Inidan Women Development Trust Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt Usharani Vs M Ramesh

M/S Sree Sowparnika Properties Vs the Commissioner

Mrs Simran Chandok Vs the State of Karnataka

Praveen Karachur Jayalingappa Vs the Commissioner