IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 29663 OF 2018 (LA-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SMT CHELUVAMMA W/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. SRI SUREGOWDA S/O LATE KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 3. SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 4. SMT LAKSHAMAMMA @ KUMARI W/O LATE SONNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 5. SRI NANJEGOWDA S/O LATE KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 6. SRI SHIVARAMEGOWDA S/O LATE KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS (ALL SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFITS NOT CLAIMED) ALL ARE R/AT ALADAHALLY VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573202.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G V NARASIMHA MURTHY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI RESERVE PROJECT-2 HOLENARASIPURA BRANCH, HASSAN DISTRICT 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KAVERI NIRAVARI NIGAM, MYSORE, KAVERI BHAVAN COMPLEX 4TH STAGE,GOKULAM MYSORE 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN DIST 4. THE CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE(LAND ACQUISITION) M S BUILDING, BANGALORE 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER NO.1,CAUVERY NIRAVARI NIGAM, SUB DIVISION, HOLENARASIPURA HASSAN DIST (NOTE: ALL PETITIONERS ARE CLAIMING THE ONE HOUSE PROPERTY & ALL ARE THE SAME. HENCE COURT FEE OF RS. 100/- IS PAID IN THIS WRIT PETITION) … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILDAR SHIRALLI, HCGP FOR R1, 3 & 4; SRI. K S BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & 5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO 5 TO ACQUIRE AND ISSUE NOTIFICATION IN RESPECT OF HOUSE PROPERTY NO.25 OF THE HULLAHALLY VILLAGE OF KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT AS PER ANNEX-G AND G1, DATED 21.5.2011 AND 21/6/2018 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioner is against non- consideration of his representation dated 21.05.2011 and 21.06.2018 at Annexures G and G1 wherein he has sought for grant of certain benefits by treating his claim as being covered under the declaration of “Sheetha Peeditha Pradesha” on the ground that the very adjoining property in the very same village has already been declared as such.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of this writ petition is substantially similar to the one in cognate W.P. Nos. 29604-29608/2018 and other connected Matters (LA-BDA) disposed off by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 13.07.2018 granting relief to the litigants therein, and therefore, similar relief needs to be granted to the petitioner herein on the principle of parity. This assertion is not much disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Both the opposing counsel fairly submit that the factuals need to be ascertained and therefore, petitioner also has to cooperate by laying at their threshold his necessary information and the documents as are required for due consideration of petitioner’s representations. The stand of the respondents is fair.
3. In the above circumstances, these writ petition succeeds in part; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondents to consider petitioner’s representations dated 21.05.2011 and 21.06.2018 at Annexures G and G1respectively within a period of six months in accordance with law keeping in view the aforesaid judgment dated 13.07.2018 and further to make known to the petitioner the result thereof, forthwith.
It is open to the respondents to solicit any further information or any relevant documents required for due consideration of the said representation subject to the rider that no delay would be brooked in that guise.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE Bsv