IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH WRIT PETITION NO.18556 OF 2017 (BDA) AND WRIT PETITION NO.18868 OF 2017 (BDA) BETWEEN:
RAJAJINAGAR EDUCATION SOCIETY (REGD) A REGISTERED SOCIETY AT NO.6/C, BEHIND DR. M.C. MODI ROAD, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 2ND STAGE WEST OF CHORD ROAD MAHALAKSHMIPURAM LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 086 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SECRETARY, MR. RAVIPRAKASH T.N. (By SRI. DHANANJAY K.V., ADV.,) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT OFFICER VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE COMMISSIONER ... PETITIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU-560 020.
... RESPONDENTS [By SMT. SHWETA KRISHNAPPA, HCGP FOR R1) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.4.2017 ISSUED BY THE R-2 IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-K AT PAGE NO.81-82 AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The plea of the petitioner is that respondent No.2- BDA granted 6 acres and 26 guntas, in all measuring 32186 Sq. Yards, situated in Sy.Nos.207/2 & 3 and 209 of Laggere village. The lease deed was executed in their favour in terms of Annexure-G, dated 21.02.1997 on various clauses. The said site was granted to the petitioner in order to establish a Nursery School.
2. The petitioner contends that the school was established. Much thereafter, by the notice vide Annexure-H, a show-cause notice was issued as to why the site should not be cancelled for violation of the terms and conditions of the lease. The same was replied in terms of the Annexure-J. Notwithstanding the same, respondent No.2-BDA have issued an order at Annexure-K terminating the lease agreement. The same is sought to be questioned herein.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as a natural course of development, the petitioner has expanded its business by establishing a school imparting primary education and high school education. The same is in continuation of establishing a nursery school. Therefore, the same cannot be cancelled.
4. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents defends the impugned order and contends that there is no merit in these petitions.
5. What has been granted to the petitioner is a civic amenity site. The same is governed by the rules of the respondent No.2-BDA. It has been allotted on various terms and conditions. The lease agreement would also indicate that if there is any violation, the lease is liable to be terminated. There is no dispute with the facts with regard to the violation of the terms and conditions of the lease. The legal reply in terms of Annexure-J clearly admits to the violation of the terms and conditions of the agreement. The land was granted only to start a Nursery School. However, the petitioner has started a primary education and high school also. In view of the fact that there is an admitted violation of the lease agreement, respondent No.2-BDA was justified in canceling the lease agreement. Hence, I find no good ground to entertain these petitions.
Consequently, these petitions are dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE PMR