Disposed

Smt. Nirmala J Shetty v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jun 2024WP/57020/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a direction to revenue authorities to consider her representation for balance compensation under an earlier High Court order. Without expressing any opinion on merits, the court permitted a fresh comprehensive representation within two weeks, to be considered by respondent No.2 within three months.

What did the court decide?

Permission to file fresh comprehensive representation within two weeks; respondent No.2 directed to consider it within three months thereafter.

Smt. Nirmala J Shetty Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:20956 WP No. 57020 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 57020 OF 2013 (LR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. NIRMALA J. SHETTY W/O JAYASHEELA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/A DALYADI HOUSE YADTHADY VILLAGE, UDUPI REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER SRI. B. HARIRAJ SHETTY S/O B.V. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/A NO.15, BASEMENT OPP. RAJ TRAVELS CUNNINGHAM ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

(BY SMT. VANAJAKSHI AND SMT. S.N. RAMA PRASAD., ADVOCATES)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI BANGALORE - 560 001

¶14

THE TAHSILDAR MANGALORE TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 003

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:20956 WP No. 57020 of 2013

¶17

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA MANGALORE - 575 003

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA K.R., AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE R-2 WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS/ORDER DT.28.2.2013 MADE IN LRY.CR.8/11-12 VIDE ANNX-A AND DIRECT THE R-2 & 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DT.15.5.2013 VIDE ANNX-G FILED BY THE PETITIONER & TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO PAY THE BALANCE COMPENSATION AMOUNT TO THE PETITIONER WITH INTEREST AT 16 .66% P.A. AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶24

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner with regard to payment of compensation pursuant to the Order dated 27.03.2012 in W.P. No.15130/2011, passed by this Court, in terms of the

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:20956 WP No. 57020 of 2013

¶26

representation dated 15.05.2013 (Annexure-G), made by the petitioner to the respondent No.2 herein.

¶27

In that view of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, as the representation at Annexure-G is of the year 2013, the petitioner is permitted to make one more comprehensive representation along with the copy of the Order passed by this Court in the aforementioned Writ Petition and the said representation be made within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Order, and the respondent No.2 shall consider such representation that may be made by the petitioner, within three months thereafter.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49

¶31

sac

Smt. Nirmala J Shetty v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nirmala J Shetty 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

H. C. Boraiah Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M Gopala Krishna Rao Vs State of Karnataka

Vanaja Shedthi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K C Narayanagowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Sunanda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Manjunath Gowda K E Vs State of Karnataka