IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO. 14559/2017 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN:
SMT MAQDOOM HASEENA BEGUM W/O PYAREJAN AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS R/A NO.13, 4TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN NEAR ST. THOMAS AQUINAS SCHOOL NIMHANS LAYOUT, BTM 1ST STAGE BANGALORE SOUTH BANGALORE-560 029 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHOJARAJA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE-560 020 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER LAND ACQUISITION BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 020 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIVEK YAVAGAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER ON 12.8.2016 AT ANNEXURES-H AND J.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRILIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
Perused the records.
2. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that the representation submitted by the petitioner for allotment of an alternative site has not been considered till date.
3. The petitioner contends that she is the full and absolute owner of the property bearing site Nos.5 and 18 formed in Survey No.16/1 of Madiwala Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, being purchased under a registered sale deed dated 15.6.1963 from her vendor Ibrahim Begum.
4. It is further contended that the respondent- Bengaluru Development Authority had acquired the petition schedule property for formation of Byrasandra, Thavarekere and Madiwala scheme. After acquiring the said property, the respondent-authority has issued a letter dated 14.7.1976 informing the petitioner to file an affidavit within one month from the date of receipt of letter and the respondent-authority had also issued a letter on 12.3.1977 informing the petitioner to deposit the amount for allotment of an alternative site. The petitioner had filed an affidavit before the respondent-authority on 1.9.1986 and sought permission to deposit the amount for allotment of an alternative site in her favour. Further a representation has been submitted on 12.08.2016.
5. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the said representation has not been considered despite several requests made.
6. In the circumstances, it would be suffice to meet the ends of justice, to direct the respondent-authorities to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 12.8.2016 and take a decision in accordance with law in an expedite manner.
Ordered accordingly.
PL* Sd/- JUDGE