IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 2893/2019(LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
SRI. D. N. RAVISHANKAR S/O. LATE D. N. MURTHY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 25 VENKATACHARI NAGAR 2ND CROSS, BEHIND LG HALLI RAILWAY STATION, LOTTEGOLLAHALLI RMV EXTENSION II STAGE BANGALORE-560 094.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADV.) AND 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 027.
2. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER THE BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, THANISANDRA WARD THANISANDRA BANGALORE-560077.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHWIN S HALADY, ADV. FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPNODENTS TO ASSESS THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER FOR PROPERTY TAX BY ENTERING THE SAME IN THE PROPERTY TAX REGISTER AND ISSUE KHATHA IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.07.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-H.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
a) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to assess the property of the petitioner for property tax by entering the same in the property tax register and issue khatha in the name of the Petitioner by considering the Representation dated 30.07.2018 vide Annexure-H; and b) Issue such other writ or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case including direction for payment of costs of this proceedings in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The only contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has given application dated 30.7.2018 vide Annexure-H. The respondent has not considered the said application. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court for seeking the above relief.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that “B” katha has been issued in respect of the property of the petitioner. Since the layout, in which the property of the petitioner is situated is not approved by the competent authority, his application vide Annexure-H for issuing “A” katha in respect of his property cannot be considered.
4. It is not in dispute that the application of the petitioner vide Annexure-H is pending before the Corporation for issuing “A” katha in respect of the property of the petitioner and the respondents have not taken any decision pursuant to Annexure-H. Therefore, it is suffice to direct the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner dated 30.7.2018 vide Annexure-H and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE DM