IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 33213 OF 2017 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
SRI D.H. KRISHNA SA S/O LATE HANUMANTHA SA AGED 77 YEARS R/A No.11/3, E.S. LANE CHICKPET, BENGALURU 560 053 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI NITESH K.N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE ) AND:
1.BRUHATH BANGLORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU 560 001 BY ITS COMMISSIONER 2.BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU 560 020 BY IT’S THE COMMISSIONER 3.THE ASSISTANT REVENUE INSPECTOR MATHIKERE SUB-DIVISION, BBMP BENGALURU-560 054 4.ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE NAGAPURA SUB-DIVISION 1ST FLOOR, RAJAJINAGARA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX 2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.N. PUTTEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1- AND R-3 ) SRI AJAY KUMAR M. ADVOCATE FOR R-2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD. 28.4.2017 ISSUED BY R-3 VIDE ANN-T. DIRECT THE R-1 AND 3 TO COLLECT PROPERTY TAX, WITHOUT INTEREST OR PENALTY CONCERNING 28951.00 SQUARE FEET OF LAND IN SY.NO.198 OF LAGGERE VILLAGE, YEHSWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, PRESENTLY COMING WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF R-1 (WARD NO.75) AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
This writ petition is directed against an endorsement dated 28.4.2017 issued by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-T. The case of the petitioner is that, land in Sy.No.198 of Laggere Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru south Taluk, measuring 1 acre was purchased by the petitioner under a registered sale deed No.2845 dated 10/12/1970. Subsequently the petitioner has got converted the said land into industrial purpose vide order dated 05.08.1972. Thereafter 2nd respondent has sanctioned modified development plan for industrial purpose vide resolution No.89 dated 18/5/1977. The petitioner has put up construction as per sanctioned plan after paying all necessary development charges and taxes.
2. After the property has been handed over to the jurisdiction of 1st respondent-Bruhuth Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike ( for short ‘BBMP’), the petitioner has filed a representation for change of khatha and collection of taxes by representation dated 13.08.2012 vide Annexure-J. Pursuant to that the respondent-BBMP has issued an endorsement dated 28.4.2017 vide Annexure-T. Being aggrieved by the same the petitioner is before this Court in this petition.
3. Sri Nitesh K.N. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the property measuring 1 acre situated in Laggere Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru south Taluk. After obtaining necessary orders for conversion of the land for industrial purpose, they have obtained sanctioned modified plan for industrial purpose on 18.05.1977 from BDA. Now that property had been transferred to BBMP. He has filed an application for change of khatha and also for collection of taxes. The endorsement at Annexure-T is issued only on the ground that the petitioner has not furnished relevant records. He further submitted that Annexure-T is issued without application of mind since the petitioner has produced relevant documents as sought by respondent No.1 and without considering the same, Annexure-T has been issued. He further submitted that the records which have been sought by the Corporation has been furnished by the petitioner as well as Bangalore Development Authority. Without considering the same, impugned order-Annexure-T is issued which is unsustainable. Hence he sought for allowing the writ petition.
4. Per contra, Sri K.N. Putte Gowda, learned counsel appearing for Corporation submitted that while considering the representation of petitioner for change of khatha, there was discrepancies in the area. Therefore, the Authority has issued impugned endorsement as per Annexure-T.
5. Petitioner claims to be the owner of land bearing Sy.
No.198, measuring 1 acre, Laggere Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru south Taluk and he has obtained conversion order vide order dated 05.08.1972 from competent authority for industrial purpose. On an application filed by the petitioner for change of khatha and collection of taxes vide Annexures-J & S, impugned order Annexure-T has been issued, which reads as under:
§ÈºÀvï ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀĺÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Á°PÉ ¸ÀASÉå:r.J.ªÁ.75/¦.Dgï.41/12-13 ¸ÀºÀ PÀAzÁAiÀÄ C¢üPÁjgÀªÀgÀ PÀbÉÃj «¨sÁUÀ, ¸ÀAQÃtð, ¢£ÁAPÀ:28.04.2017.
£ÁUÀ¥ÀÄgÀ G¥À 1£Éà ªÀĺÀr, gÁeÁf£ÀUÀgÀ ªÁtÂdå 2£Éà ¨ÁèPï, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, »A§gÀºÀ «µÀAiÀÄ: ¸ÀéwÛ£À ¸ÀASÉå:198, ®UÉÎgÉ, UÀȺÀ®Qëä §qÁªÀuÉ, 1£Éà ºÀAvÀ, ¥ÀJѪÀÄ PÁqïð gÀ¸ÉÛ, 3£Éà ºÀAvÀ, 4£Éà ¨ÁèPï, §¸ÀªÉñÀégÀ£ÀUÀgÀ, ªÁqïð-75, ±ÀAPÀgÀªÀÄoÀ, ¸ÀéwÛUÉ PÀAzÁAiÀÄ ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
G¯ÉèÃR: vÀªÀÄä ªÀÄ£À«AiÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:27.07.2013.
***** ªÉÄîÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ G¯ÉèÃRPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢üRzÀAvÉ, JæÃ.r.ºÉZï.PÀȵÀÚ¸Á, DzÀ vÁªÀÅ ¸ÀéwÛ£À ¸ÀASÉå: 198, ®UÉÎgÉ, UÀȺÀ®Qëä §qÁªÀuÉ, 1£Éà ºÀAvÀ, ¥ÀJѪÀÄ PÁqïð gÀ¸ÉÛ, 3£Éà ºÀAvÀ, 4£Éà ¨ÁèPï, §¸ÀªÉñÀégÀ£ÀUÀgÀ, eÉ.R.£ÀUÀgÀ ªÁqïð-75, ±ÀAPÀgÀªÀÄoÀ, ¸ÀéwÛUÉ PÀAzÁAiÀÄ ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ¸ÀjAiÀĵÉÖ. ©.r.J gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÀéwÛUÉ M¼ÀUÉÆAqÀAvÉ F ¸ÀévÀÛ£ÀÄß 5 ¨sÁUÀUÀ¼ÁV «AUÀrR, ¨sÁUÀ-J-
1, ¨sÁUÀ-©, ¨sÁUÀ-R, ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨sÁUÀ-r, «RÛÃtð ¸ÀéwÛUÉ §qÁªÀuÉAiÀÄ £ÀPÉë ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¤RgÀªÁzÀ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ ®¨sÀå«gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀħgÀĪÀÅ¢®è, DzÀÝjAzÀ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ C¢üPÁj (¥ÀJѪÀÄ) gÀªÀgÀÄ ©.r.J gÀªÀjAzÀ ¥ÀæJßvÀ ¸ÀéwÛUÉ F »AzÉ ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁzÀ §qÁªÀuÉ £ÀPÉëUÉ ªÀiÁ¥ÁðqÀÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¥ÀÆgÀPÀªÁzÀ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ©.r.J PÀbÉÃj¬ÄAzÀ ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ ºÁdgÀÄ¥ÀrRzÀ°è vÀªÀÄä ªÀÄ£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀjJð¸À¯ÁUÀĪÀÅzÀÄ JAzÀÄ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ w½AiÀÄ¥Àr¸À¯ÁVzÉ.
¸ÀºÀ PÀAzÁAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj £ÁUÀ¥ÀÄgÀ ªÀ®AiÀÄ, §ÈºÀvï ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀĺÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Á°PÉ.
gÀªÀjUÉ:-
1. æÃ.r.ºÉZï.PÀȵÀÚ¸Á, £ÀA.198, ®UÉÎgÉ, UÀȺÀ®Qëä §qÁªÀuÉ, 1£Éà ºÀAvÀ, ¥ÀJѪÀÄ PÁqïð gÀ¸ÉÛ, 4£Éà ¨ÁèPï, §¸ÀªÉñÀégÀ£ÀUÀgÀ, ªÁqïð-75, ±ÀAPÀgÀªÀÄoÀ.
2. PÀbÉÃj PÀqÀvÀPÉÌ.
6. By reading of the same, it is mentioned that the petitioner has not produced relevant documents related to modification of the plan. But in the endorsement issued by the BDA vide Annexure-P states that all documents are submitted to Corporation. In the impugned endorsement Annexure-T, there is no reference to that record. Hence, impugned order at Annexure-T is passed without application of mind and the same is unsustainable in law. It requires reconsideration.
7. Only contention now raised by the learned counsel for the BBMP is that there is a discrepancy in the area mentioned in the documents available with BBMP. Under these circumstances it is appropriate to remit the matter to respondent No.1 for re-consideration of the representation filed by the petitioner as per Annexures-J & S in accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If required the respondent can conduct a spot inspection after giving notice to the petitioner.
It is needless to mention that before passing any order pursuant to representation at Annexure-J and S, petitioner has to be heard and then appropriate orders be passed in accordance with law.
With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE HR