IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.24465 OF 2017(BDA) BETWEEN:
SMT. H. R. KUMARILAKSHMIDEVI W/O SHRI C SIDDALINGA NAYAKA (LATE) AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RETIRED LECTURER GOVT JUNIOR COLLEGE R/AT NO.810, BYRAVESHWARANA NILAYA VIJAYANAGAR IV STAGE, III PHASE, SRS STOP, NEAR HOOTGALLI MYSORE-570018.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI HARISH T.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT “VIKAS SOUDHA”
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001.
2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NO.7 T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU-560 020. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI D.R. ANANDEESWAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI HARISH KUMAR V.L., ADVOCATE FOR SRI ASHWIN C., ADVOCATE FOR R2) **** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12.12.2016 AND 22.5.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A TO A3 AND TO ALLOT THE ALTERNATE SITE IN THE LAYOUT FORMED BY THE R-2 AT KEMPE GOWDA LAYOUT / ARKAVATHI LAYOUT TO THE PETITIONER.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner, a retired Lecturer of Government Junior College is before this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the request made by the petitioner dated 12.12.2016 and 22.5.2017 as per Annexures ‘A to A3’ and allot the alternative site in the lay- out formed by the 2nd respondent at Kempe Gowda lay- out/Arkavathi layout to the petitioner.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is a senior citizen and retired Lecturer of a Government Junior College. She made an application for allotment of a three bed-room flat in the BDA apartment at Doddabanahalli (II Stage) under ST Category and Government employee quota and she had claimed priority as per the notification dated 28.2.2014. The petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as initial deposit and subsequently paid Rs.8,31,250/- and Rs.8,31,250/- by way of two Demand Drafts. Thus, in all, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.18,37,500/-.
3. It is further case of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent – Bangalore Development Authority (‘BDA’ for short) had allotted three bed-room flat to her in the last floor of the apartment. But, basic civic amenities like ‘water’ and proper ‘power back up’ are not available and flat allotted was not fit to occupy. Therefore, the petitioner made representations to allot alternative site instead of flat. The same have not been considered. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court for the reliefs sought for.
4. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that in terms of the allotment made by the BDA, the flat was provided with all the basic civil amentias, but the petitioner wants alternative site instead of flat. Therefore the 2nd respondent refunded the entire amount paid by the petitioner on 15.2.2018 after deducting 10% initial deposit. The same was received by the petitioner without any protest. He further submits that if the 2nd respondent – BDA calls for applications for allotment of sites in Kempegowda lay-out/Arkavathy lay-out and if the petitioner files an application for allotment of site, the same will be considered and pass orders in accordance with law.
5. In view of the fair submission made by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file an application in case the 2nd respondent calls for applications for allotment of sites in Kempegowda lay-out/Arkavathi layout. If such an application is filed, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law.
With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-