IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION NO.1770 OF 2017 (BDA) BETWEEN:
SMT.D.C.NAVANEETHA D/O.D.CHANDRASHEKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.489, GROUND FLOOR 2ND STAGE, 35TH BLOCK, 6TH MAIN 11TH CROSS, RAJA MAHAL VILAS LAYOUT HIG COLONY BANGALORE-560 094 (BY SRI.RAMAKRISHNA M., ADV.- ABSENT) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS COMMISSIONER KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE-560 020 3. VISHWABHARATHI HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.B.KRISHNA BHAT #35, RATNAVILASA ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BANGALORE-560 004 … PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.S.INDIRESH, AGA FOR R-1 SRI.M.N.SUDEV HEGDE, ADV. FOR R-2 (VK FILED) SRI.BIPIN HEGDE, ADV. FOR R-2 (VK NOT FILED) SRI.B.L.SANJEEV & SRI.B.L.ABHIJITH, ADV. FOR R-3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 BDA CONSIDERING THE GRIEVANCES OF THE PETITIONER MADE UNDER REPRESENTATIONS AS PER ANNEX-K 09.05.2016 RESPECTIVELY, KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE ORDER OF BULK ALLOTMENT MADE BY THE R-1 DATED: 04.10.2007 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Petitioner has sought for the following relief:
(a) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent BDA considering the grievances of the petitioner made under representations as per Annexure-K dated 09.05.2016 respectively, keeping in view of the order of bulk allotment made by the 1st respondent in No.NaAaEe26 7BemAaSe2004 dated 04.10.2007.
2. BDA – concerned respondent is yet to address the grievance of the petitioner in passing suitable speaking order. Time again Courts have held that whenever any application/representation is made by a person, concerned competent authority is required to pass an order either accepting the grievance of the petitioner or rejecting by passing a speaking order. In the present case, there is inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in not addressing the grievance of the petitioner. Therefore, 2nd respondent is hereby directed to pass a speaking order on the petitioner’s grievance and communicate the decision to the petitioner at the earliest. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE BS