IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.30008 OF 2019 (LA-UDA) BETWEEN:
Smt. Renuka W/o. Sri Guruswamy, D/o. late Sri Siddaiah, Aged about 42 years, R/o No.161, S.Uttanahalli, Hadajana Post, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk, Mysuru – 573 311.
(By Sri M.V.Hiremath, Advocate) AND:
The Land Acquisition Officer Mysuru Urban Development Authority, Mysuru - 573 311.
… Petitioner … Respondent - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent to drop the acquisition proceedings in respect of land bearing Sy.No.26 measuring 13 guntas standing in the name of deceased Sri K.Siddaiah Bin Kalappa out of total area 1 acres 12 guntas and Sy.No.19/2 measuring 08 guntas situated at Sarakari Uttanahalli Village, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk and District in terms of preliminary notification dated: 12.12.2006 as per Annexure-B and etc., This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:-
ORDER Sri M.V.Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent.
3. The petition is admitted for hearing and the same is heard finally. Perused the records.
4. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to the respondent to decide the representation dated 06.06.2019 at Annexure-F submitted by the petitioner and to drop the acquisition proceedings in terms of preliminary notification dated 12.12.2006 at Annexure-B.
5. When the matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the preliminary notification was initiated on 12.12.2006 and thereafter, no further action in the matter has been taken in that regard. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner gave a representation dated 06.06.2019 to the competent authority and the aforesaid authority be directed to decide the said representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a stipulated time.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the said representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order which passed today.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
PYR Sd/- JUDGE