IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.33831 OF 2015 (GM-KSSIDC) BETWEEN:
LEELAVATHI D/O LATE VENKATARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O DHANALAKSHMI SILK TWISTING FACTORY NEAR GOVT. COCOON MARKET MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT (BY MR.VINAY SWAMY C., ADV.) AND:
1. KARNATAKA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT A.O. BUILDING INDUSTRIAL ESTATE RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 044 BY ITS CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR 2. CHIEF MANAGER (Iez) ZONE-I KARNATAKA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT A.O. BUILDING INDUSTRIAL ESTATE … PETITIONER RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 044 … RESPONDENTS (BY MR.PUTHIGA R RAMESH, ADV.) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE R-1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-H & J FOR GRANT OF INDUSTRIAL PLOT TO THE PETITIONER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SCHEME OF THE NOTIFICATION AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Vinay Swamy C., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Puttige R.Ramesh, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to the respondent No.1 to consider the representation contained in Annexures H and J with regard to grant of industrial plot to the petitioner.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the representation submitted by him shall be considered. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law if not already decided.
4. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the competent authority to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner, if not already decided in accordance with law by a speaking order within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
5. With regard to the other reliefs, which have been claimed by the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to him under the law. Till the representation submitted by the petitioner is decided, ad-interim order dated 11.08.2015 shall continue. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS