IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.12728-12730/2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN 1. PRASANNA KUMAR S/O KRISHANACHARI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT #302 L2 B-3, 3RD CROSS, 22ND MAIN ROAD SURYANAGARA BANGALORE-560 099 2. S. LEELAVATHI W/O THULASIRAM AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT NO.001,FLAT NO.2 L.I.G. 1, SURAYANAGARA, 1ST STAGE, CHANDAPURA ANAKEL ROAD, BANGALORE-560 099 3. B.KRISHNAMURTHY S/O BASAVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT BANDIHOLE VILLAGE LAKSHMIPURE K R PETA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571401.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHRISTOPHER NOEL, ADVOCATE ) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE HOUSING BOARD COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD BANGALORE-560 009.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.D.HARSHA, AGA FOR R1 SRI. BASAVARAJ V. SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2 ) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO ALLOT VACANT SITES/HOUSES I.E., HOUSE NOS.LIG-1262, LIG-193 AND MIG2- 1099 AT SURYA NAGAR, 1ST STAGE, KHB BANGALORE AS PER ANNEXURE-B SERIES.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri. Chistorpher Noel.A, learned Counsel for the petitioners.
Sri. Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Sri.Basavaraj V.Sabarad, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
The petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matters are heard finally.
2. In these writ petitions, petitioners, inter alia, seeks direction to 2nd respondent to allot house NOs.LIG- 1262, LIG-193 AND MIG2-1099 at Surya Nagar 1st stage, KHB, Bangalore.
3. When the matters were taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that with regard to their grievance, petitioners have submitted representations to respondent No.2 and direction be issued to the 2nd respondent to consider their representations and decide the same by a speaking order in a fixed time limit.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 submits that suitable decision on the representation, if not already taken, shall be taken expeditiously.
5. In view of the submissions made by the learned Additional Government Advocate and in the facts of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representations submitted by the petitioners by a speaking order within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the cases.
Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ln.