IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.51800/2015 (BDA) BETWEEN:
N Narasimha Kiran, Aged about 40 years, S/o late Sri B.N. Nanjundappa No.108, Tapovana Off Kanakapura Road Tataguni Post, B.M.Kaval, Bangalore 560 062 Represented by his Power of Attorney Holder Smt. Susheelamma Nanjundappa Aged 70 years … Petitioner (By Sri. C.M. Poonacha, Advocate) AND:
The Bangalore Development Authority T.Chowdaiah Road Kumara Park West Bangalore 560020 Represented by its Chairman ...Respondent This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent to allot the very same site bearing House List No.453, in Survey No.167/2 situated at Ramasandra village, Solekere panchayat, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, measuring 30X40 ft. surrendered by the respondent since the same remains unutilized , issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the Preliminary Notification NO. BDA/COMMR/DC(LA)/ALAO/10/2001-2002 dated 14.12.2001 published in the Official Gazette on 24.1.2001 and Final Notification No. UDD-654-MNX- 2002 dated 31.10.2002, since the Respondent has failed to pass the award, despite lapse of 13 years from the date of publication of Final Notification and hence the acquisition proceedings is deemed to have been lapsed and that the acquisition proceedings, have been abandoned by the BDA in so far as the Schedule Property of the petitioner is concerned or in the alternative, allot an alternate site of equivalent value in the same layout as assured, to the petitioner measuring 30X40 ft. or in one of the layouts being acquired by the BDA for formation of Sri M Vishweshwaraiah layout at Ramansandra village, Solekere Panchayat, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk as compensation for acquiring his site.
This writ petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner was the owner of site bearing House List No.453, Katha No.167/2, situated at Ramasandra village, Solekere, within the limits of Solekere Panchayat, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, which was part of Sy.No.167/2. The land in Sy.No.167/2 along with site belonging to the petitioner was acquired by the BDA for the purpose of formation of Sri M Vishweshwaraiah Layout. However, in respect of petitioner no award was passed and no compensation was paid. Hence, petitioner moved the BDA filing an application under Right to Information Act, seeking certain particulars regarding passing of the award and payment of compensation etc., The said application is produced at Annexure-J. In reply, the Additional Land Acquisition Officer, BDA, Bengaluru informed the petitioner that if petitioner possessed Encumbrance Certificate, residential certificate and the sketch showing the site formed in the revenue land, then he had to make a requests for grant of alternate site whereupon the same would be considered. This communication issued by the Land Acquisition Officer, BDA is produced at Annexure-L.
2. Pursuant to the said endorsement, petitioner has made a representation in the month of June 2015 to the BDA requesting for allotment of alternate site expeditiously. Along with the representation, petitioner has enclosed several documents. This is evident from Annexure-Q, application filed for allotment of site by the petitioner. As no action has been taken, petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the BDA to allot the very same site bearing house list No.453, in Sy.No.167/2 of Ramansandra Village, Solekere Panchayat, Kengeri Hobli, or in the alternative an alternate site equivalent in value, in the same layout measuring 30X40ft. or in any other developed layout in lieu of site acquired by the BDA for formation of Sri M Vishweshwaraiah Lay Out, at Ramasandra village.
3. In response to the notice issued in this petition BDA has entered appearance. Learned counsel for the BDA Sri. Tharanath Shetty, on instructions from the BDA submits that as petitioner had filed application enclosing certain documents seeking allotment of the very land or alternate site, the same will be considered as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 6 months from today.
4. It is not in dispute that site belonging to the petitioner has been utilized by the BDA. It is also not in dispute that the BDA has not paid any compensation to the petitioner, so far. The BDA was not justified in not paying any compensation for the property acquired. The request made by the petitioner for grant of alternate site is just and reasonable. The BDA ought to have considered the said request expeditiously.
5. Now that a fair submission is made on behalf of the BDA that application would be considered within a period of six months, I deem it, just and appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the BDA to positively consider and allot an alternate site of the same dimension either in the same locality or in the nearby locality as expeditiously as possible at any rate within the outer limit of six months from today.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, IA 1/16 does not survive for consideration, accordingly the same is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE PSG*