IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE & THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NOS.82 & 83-86 OF 2019 (BDA) IN WRIT PETITION NOS.28750/2017(BDA) & 29344-29347/2017 BETWEEN:
1.SRI K N VENKATESH S/O SRI K N N IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1294 6TH CROSS CHANDRA LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 040 2.SMT AMRUTHA VENKATESH W/O SRI K N VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1294 6TH CROSS CHANDRA LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 040 3.SRI K V SRINANDAN S/O SRI K N VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1294 6TH CROSS CHANDRA LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 040 ... APPELLANTS (BY SMT. LAKSHMY IYENGAR SENIOR ADV. FOR SRI B.ROOPESHA, ADV.) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SANKEYS ROAD, NEAR 5TH MAIN ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI BENGALURU-560 020 2. M SHANMUGAM S/O MUTHUSWAMY MAJOR R/AT NO.72/C RAGAVENDRA NILAYA 7TH MAIN R P C LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 040 REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDERS:
A. CHIKKAREVANNA S/O AJJAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.255/N, 3RD BLOCK BHANASHANKARI 6TH STAGE BENGALURU - 560 052 B. SATHYANARAYANA DEVAN DIXIT S/O DHAKSHINAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO.294/1, 7TH CROSS, 6TH BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, NAGARABHAVI BDA LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 072 3. R BHAVYA W/O CHIKKAREVANNA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT NO.255/N, 3RD BLOCK, BHANASHANKARI 6TH STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 052.
4. SMT. ADILAKSHMI RAJENDRAN W/O SRI RAHENDRAN NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.765/A 515 COLONY, 60 FEET ROAD, HAL III STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 038 5. SRI RAJENDRAN NARAYANASWAMY S/ SRI NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.765/A 515 COLONY, 60 FEET ROAD HAL III STAGE, BENGALURU-560 038. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. A.V. ADITHI, ADV. FOR R1;
SRI T.N. RAGHUPATHY, ADV. FOR R2(A & B)&R3; SRI D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADV. FOR R4 & R5) THESE WRIT APPEALS ARE FILED U/S. 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22/11/2018 PASSED ON I.A. NO.2/2018 AND ORDER DATED 15/12/2018 PASSED ON I.A. NO.2/2017 AND I.A. NO.3/2018 IN WRIT PETITION NOS.28750/2017 AND 29344-347/2017 (BDA).
THESE WRIT APPEALS COMING UP FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH I.A. NOS.1 AND 2 OF 2019 THIS DAY, HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT There is a delay of 18 days in filing these appeals. Appellants have filed I.A. No.2 of 2019 for condonation of delay. Accepting the reasons stated in the affidavit annexed to the application, I.A. No.2 of 2019 is allowed and delay in filing these appeals is condoned.
2. With consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, appeals are admitted and heard for final disposal.
3. These appeals have been filed praying to set aside the orders dated 22.11.2018 and 15.12.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge on I.A. Nos.2/2018, 3/2018 & 2/2017 in W.P. Nos.28750 and 29344-29347 of 2017.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that appellants have filed W.P. Nos.28750 and 29344-29347 of 2017, claiming that land in Sy. No.211 measuring 2 acres situated at Banaswadi, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk belongs to them and the respondent – BDA is trying to allot the said land in favour of respondent Nos.2 to 5 herein who are the beneficiaries of sites. By the order dated 19.07.2017, both parties were directed to maintain status-quo and the said interim order was extended from time to time. Respondents – beneficiaries sought to vacate the said status-quo order by filing I.A.2/2018. Learned Single Judge allowed the said application and by order dated 22.11.2018, vacated the interim order to the extent the same relates to sites of the applicants in Sy. No.246/3. Seeking to recall the said order dated 22.11.2018, appellants – petitioners filed application in I.A.3/2018.
Learned Single Judge disposed of I.A.3/2018 along with I.A.2/2017 extending the benefit of order dated 22.11.2018 to the applicants in I.A.2/2017 as well, and subject to the outcome of the writ petitions. Seeking to restore the interim order granted by the learned Single Judge, appellants have preferred these writ appeals.
5. Learned Senior Counsel further contended that since the status-quo order was vacated, appellants are apprehending threat of interference by the BDA with respect to land in Sy. No.211.
6. Learned counsel representing the Bangalore Development Authority submitted that sites formed in Sy. No.246/3 have been allotted to various beneficiaries and BDA will not interfere with land in Sy. No.211.
7. In the light of the submission made on behalf of BDA and the submission of learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, we dispose of these appeals recording the submission that BDA will not interfere with the land in Sy.No.211. Liberty is reserved to both parties to urge all their contentions before the learned Single Judge in the pending writ petitions.
8. Consequently, I.A. No.1 of 2019 seeking for stay, does not survive for consideration and it is disposed of.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE sac*