Smt J Shantha Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt J Shantha Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent No.2 (Commissioner, BDA) directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated 25.08.2021 and 01.03.2024 (Annexures-K and K1) keeping in view the Committee's report/order dated 07.04.2021 (Annexure-E) and the engineer's report dated 26.03.2024 (Annexure-J), and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within an outer limit of three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing respondent No.2 (BDA) to consider the petitioner's representations dated 25.08.2021 and 01.03.2024 (Annexures-K and K1) for allotment of alternative site No.559/1 (15 x 24 meter) at Sir M. Visweswaraiah Layout, 5th Block, Bengaluru, in terms of the Executive Engineer's report and the CD furnished dated 26.03.2024. +1 more

Court's answer

Writ petition allowed. Respondent No.2-Authority directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated 25.08.2021 and 01.03.2024 (Annexures-K and K1) keeping in view the Committee's report/order dated 07.04.2021 (Annexure-E) and the engineer's report dated 26.03.2024 (Annexure-J), and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

Ratio / Principle

As an undisputed fact, pursuant to the order in W.P.23475/2010 c/w 1032/2006 and 36275/2009 the Committee recommended confirmation of the petitioner's 'G' category allotment and, the original site not being available, an alternative site (schedule property) was identified for allotment; the petitioner's grievance would be redressed by appropriate directions to respondent No.2 to consider her representations in light of the Committee's order dated 07.04.2021 and the subsequent report dated 26.03.2024.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (BDA) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India — allotment of alternative site by Bangalore Development Authority. Petitioner, allotted 'G' category site No.73 (50 x 80 feet), Rajmahal Vilas 2nd Stage Layout (allotment dated 17.12.2019), saw 'G' category allotments annulled by this Court in PIL by order dated 25.08.2012, with savings for allottees otherwise eligible under the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984. The Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar Committee, by report dated 07.04.2021, held the petitioner's allotment valid under the General Category Rules and recommended confirmation. The original site having been de-notified, the BDA identified alternative site No.559/1 (15 x 24 meter) at Sir M. Visweswaraiah Layout, 5th Block, and the Executive Engineer's CD report dated 26.03.2024 recommended its allotment. Representations dated 25.08.2021 and 01.03.2024 (Annexures-K and K1) went unconsidered. Held, allowing the petition: respondent No.2 directed to consider the representations in light of the Committee's report dated 07.04.2021 and the engineer's report dated 26.03.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three months of receipt of certified copy of the order (K.S. Hemalekha, J.).

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner was originally allotted 'G' category site No.73 measuring 50 x 80 feet at Rajmahal Vilas 2nd Stage Layout on 17.12.2019; pursuant thereto she deposited the entire sital value with the second respondent and a lease-cum-sale agreement was executed in her favour.¶31
Prior proceeding
The 'G' category allotment was challenged in a public interest litigation; by order dated 25.08.2012 this Court annulled all 'G' category allotments while saving allottees otherwise eligible under the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984, and directed the Government to constitute a committee to verify such allotments.¶34
Prior proceeding
Pursuant to that order, the Government constituted the Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar Committee ('Committee') to examine the allotment of 'G' category sites; the petitioner's allotment was referred to the Committee for enquiry.¶34
Prior proceeding
By report dated 07.04.2021 the Committee held the petitioner's allotment valid under the General Category Rules and recommended the BDA (second respondent) to confirm the allotment of the said site to the allottee/petitioner and fulfil other pending formalities.¶34
Prior proceeding
Based on the Committee's report the petitioner sought execution of the sale deed; the Executive Engineer surveyed the site and found the original site de-notified by the authority; consequently the BDA recommended allotment of an alternative site bearing No. 559/1 (schedule property), which the Executive Engineer inspected, identified and recommended for allotment to the petitioner by CD report.¶38
Prior proceeding
Petitioner filed representations dated 25.08.2021 and 01.03.2024 (Annexures-K and K1) seeking allotment of alternative site No.559/1; despite repeated representations and the Committee's recommendation, respondent No.2 had neither considered nor finalised the allotment, prompting this writ petition.¶30
Prior proceeding
Executive Engineer's CD report dated 26.03.2024 (Annexure-J) recommending allotment of the alternative site to the petitioner.¶54