Sri. Dhananjaya Murthy Vs the Commissioner

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:749 WP No. 33522 of 2015

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 33522 OF 2015 (LA-BDA)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. DHANANJAYA MURTHY S/O SRI. PILLAPP, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.95, BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR, 2^ND STAGE, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, JNANABHARATHI POST, BANGALORE-560 056.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. H.T. VASANTH KUMAR.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020.

¶14

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. B. VACHAN.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 THE COMMISSIONER, B.D.A., T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020, TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER AND TO ALLOT

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:749 WP No. 33522 of 2015

¶20

THE ALTERNATE SITE OF REMAINING 50% I.E. TO AN EXTENT OF 1200 SQ. FT. OF DEVELOPED SITE TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Petitioner is before this Court seeking following reliefs:

¶25

1. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st Respondent -the Commissioner, B.D.A., T.Chowdaiah Road, Kumara Park West, Bangalore 560 020, to consider the request of the Petitioner and to allot the alternate site of remaining 50% i.e. to an extent of 1200 Sq.Ft. of developed site to the Petitioner:

¶26

2. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to allot an alternate site to an extent of 50% i.e. to an extent of 1200 Sq. Ft. of developed site to the Petitioner, as the Respondents have utilized 2400 Sq.Ft. in Site No.1 formed out of Sy.No.143/2 of Hullalu Village, Yashwanthapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk and further direct them to allot 50% of site as an alternate site, as ordered in W.P.No.45695/2011 (BDA) dt.26.07.2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court, which is produced at Annexure -G to the Writ Petition.

¶27

3. Pass such other orders, as the Petitioner is entitle to in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the cost of the proceedings, in the interest of the justice and equity.

¶28

Case of the petitioner is that he was the absolute

¶29

owner of the residential site bearing No.1, measuring East to

¶30

3 -

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:749 WP No. 33522 of 2015

¶32

West 60 Ft. and North to South 40 Ft., totally measuring 2400 Sq.Ft forming part of Sy.No.143/2 of Hullalu Village, which was utilized by the respondent-BDA for formation of a road without acquiring the same. It is further case of the petitioner that the respondent-BDA has allotted a site bearing No.1977/A, measuring 108 Sq.mtrs, at Sir.M.Viveshwaraya Layout, 5^th Block, which is only 50% of the site which has been utilized by the respondent-BDA for formation of the road. As such, the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking allotment of remaining 50% of the site.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to document at Annexure-F, which is a resolution dated 28.12.2004, passed by the respondent-BDA allotting equivalent extent of land to the persons similarly situated with that of the petitioner. He also refers to the order dated 26.07.2012 passed by the CoOrdinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.45695/2011. Wherein, the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the petitioner therein to submit a representation to the respondent-BDA with certain observation made thereunder.

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:749 WP No. 33522 of 2015

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the matter for sometime submits that the petitioner in this case also be given liberty to make a representation in the light of Annexures-F and G and a direction be issued to the respondent-BDA to consider the same in a time bound manner.

¶37

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-BDA

¶38

submitted that a representation, if made, shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶39

Submissions taken on record.

¶40

Petition is disposed of. Petitioner is at liberty to make a representation as sought for within a period of thirty days from the date of disposal of this petition and respondent-BDA shall consider the same within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

¶41

Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶42

RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Sri. Dhananjaya Murthy v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Dhananjaya Murthy v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri G Chikka Bayanna Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. N R Amarnath Vs the Commissioner

Vemuri Sambashiva Rao Vs the Commissioner

Sri v Muralidhara Vs Special Land Acquisition Officers and Competent Authority

Smt. Anjala Nirmala, Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Ashwathamma Vs the State of Karnataka