IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.42920 OF 2018 (GM - RES) BETWEEN:
SMT. B.V.LAKSHMI, W/O L.NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O NO.193, 27 CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGARA 6TH BLOCK, BANGALORE – 560 082. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.GOPALAKRISHNA KURANDWAD, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY IT’S MANAGING DIRECTOR, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.85, K.H.ROAD, NGO COLONY, SUDHAMA NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 027.
2. CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER, BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, NO.85, K.H.ROAD, NGO COLONY, SUDHAMA NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 027. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH LETTER DATED 26.09.2006 MARKED AS ANNEXURE – D AND ETC.
- - -
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of both the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, petitioner inter alia seeks quashment of communication dated 26.09.2006 issued by Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation and also letter dated 04.10.2007 issued by the second respondent.
3. The facts giving rise to the filing of the writ petition is that on 18.5.2005, the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation through second respondent unveiled a scheme expressing intention to induct 410 private buses into its transportation service to supplement its services. The petitioner by communication dated 29.06.2005 offered to supply 10 buses and deposited Rs.1,00,000/- as earned money deposit. Petitioner’s husband has also made a similar application to the respondents and deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. Thereupon, the letter of intent was issued to the petitioner on 19.01.2006. On 4/12-07-2006, second respondent issued final notice to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to give explanation for not adhering to the terms of letter of intent within a period of 7 days from the date of receipt of the notice. On 12.07.2006, the petitioner has submitted his reply to the aforesaid notice, in which request was made to transfer the letter of intent in favour of one Mr.Guruswamy, Managing Director of PPS Tours and travels India (Pvt.) Ltd., Egmore, Chennai. Thereupon, by an order dated 26.09.2006, second respondent transferred the letter of intent in favour of aforesaid Mr.Guruswamy and forfeited the earned money deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has approached this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised similar contention that impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as without issuing any notice nor affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents did not dispute the fact that the impugned order dated 26.09.2006 has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
6. In view of the fact that the impugned order dated 26.09.2006 has been passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the same is hereby quashed and set aside and also the letter dated 04.10.2017 issued by the second respondent vide Annexure-‘H’ is also hereby quashed. Respondent No.2 is directed to afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to decide the issue of refund of the earnest money deposit by a speaking order within a period of one month from the date of certified copy of the order passed today. Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB