IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.56650 OF 2018 (LA-KIADB) Between:
Shri. P.C.Lakshminarayan S/o late Pangini Chennappa Aged about 58 years Residing at Devala Panjini Near Maruthi Gymnasium Kanchappanapete Doddaballapur-561 203.
… Petitioner (By Sri.Prasanna Kumar R.S., Advocate - Absent) And:
1. The State of Karnataka Department of Commerce and Industries Vikasa Soudha, Bengaluru-560 001.
by its Principal Secretary.
2. The Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, East Wing, Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru-560 001, Represented by its Chief Executive Officer and Executive Member.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer-2, The Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, No.14/1, Aravinda Bhavan, 1st Floor, Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560 001.
…Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to consider the representation dated 05.11.2013 vide Annexure-J thereby directing the respondents to allot developed land as per Government Order dated 30.05.2010 vide Annexure-G.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER None for the petitioner.
2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.
3. Record perused. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a for a writ of mandamus directing respondents to consider the representation dated 05.11.2013 vide Annexure-J thereby directing the respondents to allot developed land as per Government Order dated 30.05.2010 vide Annexure-G.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner at Annexure-J dated 05.11.2013 within fixed time limit.
5. In view of the submission made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider the representation at Annexure-J dated 05.11.2013 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-