Venkappa Kareppa Gayakwad Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, WRIT OF MANDAMUS MAY KINDLY BE ISSUED BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-D, DATED 09.08.2017 AND ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN

¶26

‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2157 WP No. 111809 of 2017

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

¶30

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶31

a) Writ of mandamus may kindly be issued by directing the Respondent no.1 to 3 to consider the representations of the petitioners vide Annexure-D, dated 09.08.2017 in the ends of justice.

¶32

b) Any other writ or order or directions may kindly be issued in favour of the Petitioners by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶33

The petitioners claim that their lands were acquired for housing purposes by the Housing Board and in terms of the Government Order dated 07.06.2011 at Annexure-C, despite the representation having been submitted, sites have not been allotted to the petitioner. In that background that the petitioners are before this Court seeking for a mandamus as above stated.

¶34

Learned counsel for the Housing Board would submit,

¶35

firstly that the petitioners have sold their respective

¶36

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2157 WP No. 111809 of 2017

¶37

lands for market consideration way back in the year 2007 and that the Government Order dated 07.06.2011 does not apply to Sattur Village as regards which the petitioners have executed sale deeds. It is in that background that the above petitions are required to be dismissed.

¶38

Having gone through the documents, it is categorically seen that the lands of the petitioners have not been acquired, but have been sold by the petitioners to the Housing Board under the registered sale deeds, under which the petitioners received market consideration. The Government Order dated 07.06.2011, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, does not apply to Sattur Village, but applies to other villages. As such, the petitioners cannot claim right under the said Government Order.

¶39