IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.43818 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR B N SREENIVASA S/O NAGARAJA AGE 60 YEARS SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT(RETD) R/AT QUARTERS NO.DC-2B NEW TOWN SAIL-VISL BHADRAVATHI – 577301 SHIMOGA DISTRICT. … PETITIONER (By Mr. NAVEED AHMED ADV.) AND:
1. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER-TA 3. ASSISTANT MANAGER –TA RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 MAY BE SERVED AT STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD VISVESWARAYA IRON & STEEL PLANT BHADRAVATI – 577301 SHIMOGA DISTRICT. … RESPONDENTS (By Mr. B RAVI SHANKAR, ADV. FOR Mr. J KANIKARAJ, ADV. FOR R1-R3) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned communication dated 14.07.2016 issued by R-3 at Annex-A; and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.B.Ravi Shankar, learned counsel for Sri.J.Kanikaraj, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
a) Issue Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned communication No.TA/195/2016-17 dated 14-07-2016 issued by the 3rd Respondent at ‘Annexure-A’, in interest of justice and equity.
b) Issue Writ order or direction directing the respondents to allot the quarters No.DC- 2B, New Town under licensing scheme for retired employees at Annexure-F, in the interest of justice and equity.
c) Pass such other order or further orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.
d) Grant cost of this litigation since the petitioner is a retired employee.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to submit fresh representation to the competent authority and the aforesaid authority shall be directed to decide the representation for allotment of accommodation under the scheme as per the entitlement of the petitioner. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that in case the petitioner submits such a representation, his prayer for allotment shall be considered as per the scheme and he shall be allotted an accommodation which is reserved for retired employees within a period of one month from the date of making of such a representation.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and in the facts of the case and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner submits a representation to the competent authority within a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, for allotment of the accommodation under the scheme which is meant for retired employees, the Appellate Authority shall decide the representation submitted by the petitioner as per his entitlement under the aforesaid scheme and shall allot him the accommodation to which he is entitled under the scheme meant for retired employees within a period of one month from the date of submission of such representation. On such allotment being made, the petitioner shall vacate the accommodation in occupation within one month. Till the representation submitted by the petitioner is decided, he shall be entitled to continue in the accommodation in occupation.
6. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV