IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.52123/2019 (BDA) BETWEEN:
SMT.PUTTALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE VEERACHARI AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/AT BHIMANAKUPPA VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK. …PETITIONER (BY SRI CHOKKAREDDY, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REP. BY ITS SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.
2. COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Dr. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE-560020.
3. ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Dr. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE-560020.
4. POLICE INSPECTOR [VIGILANCE AND STF] BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Dr. CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK, SHESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-560020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI E.S.INDIRESH, AGA. FOR R-1; SMT.PUSHPA KANTHA, ADV. FOR R-2 TO R-4.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A DATED 20.11.2019 IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.73 MEASURING 3 ACRES, SITUATED AT BHIMANAKUPPA VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT No.4; AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 20.11.2019 at Annexure-A to the writ petition issued by the respondent No.4 whereby the petitioner has been called upon to appear for the enquiry on 26.11.2019 along with relevant documents relating to the land in Sy.No.73 measuring 3 acres, situated at Bhimanakuppa village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk.
2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the aforesaid land in Sy.No.73 measuring 3 acres having acquired through Saguvali Chit issued in favour of the petitioner on 06.01.1959 by the respondent No.1. It is the contention of the petitioner that the mutation and revenue entries depicted the name of the petitioner subsequent to issuance of the Saguvali Chit. However, the same was discontinued after computerization of RTCs. In this regard, the petitioner has made repeated representations but in vain. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed R.A.No.339/2011-12 before the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore under Section 136 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and the same was allowed, directing the respondents to continue the name of the petitioner in computerized RTCs.
3. It is submitted that the said land was acquired by the Bangalore Development Authority [BDA] for formation of Kempegowda Residential Layout. The third respondent has issued the letter of genuineness regarding the land records of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has submitted all the records/documents pertaining to the land in question on 26.11.2019. However, the respondents are harassing the petitioner requesting again to submit the records which is nothing but abuse of process of law. Hence, the present writ petition.
4. Having considered the prayer sought in the writ petition inasmuch as the challenge to the notice dated 20.11.2019 issued by the fourth respondent said to have been complied with by the petitioner, having appeared before the fourth respondent with all the relevant documents relating to the land in question, no further adjudication on the said notice is warranted. Writ petition is misconceived.
Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to seek redressal of grievance, in accordance with law, if any adverse order is passed against the petitioner by the respondents.
NC.
Sd/- JUDGE