IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION No.18446 OF 2018 (BDA) Between Sri. Dattamurthy B.G., S/o. Late B.R. Govind, Aged about 49 years, R/at. No.6/41, Chamrajpet, 9th Cross, 4th Main Road, Bengaluru – 560 018. ... Petitioner (By Sri. B.S.Reddy., Advocate) AND 1. The commissioner, Bengaluru Development Authority, T.Chowdaiah Road, Bengaluru-560 001.
2. Deputy Secretary-2, Bengaluru Development Authority, T.Chowdaiah Road, Bengaluru – 560 020. ... Respondents (By Sri. M.V.Vedamurthy, Advocate for R2; R1 served) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the endorsement dated 31.1.2018 issued by the R-2 which is at Annexure-K and etc., This writ petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner has called in question the endorsement dated 31.01.2018 issued by the respondent-BDA at Annexure-J casting certain aspersions on him stating that the documents produced are not the genuine ones. By the said endorsement, the respondent-BDA has instucted the petitioner to appear before the Superintendent of Police attached to the office of the BDA, for enquiry.
2. The second prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent-BDA to execute a regular Sale Deed in his favour in terms of the Allotment Letter and other documents which prima facie establish the payment of the sital price after allotment.
3. After service of notice, the respondents have entered appearance through their Panel Counsel Sri.Vedamurthy who having opposed the writ petition for some time, now fairly submits that the matter needs fresh consideration and if a reasonable period is prescribed, the said exercise would be undertaken in a time bound manner, subject to co-operation from petitioner side as well. The prayer of the petitioner is innocuous and the stand of the respondent-BDA is fair and reasonable.
4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds in part; a Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned endorsement dated 31.01.2018 at Annexure-K; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law, within a period of three months, after holding a reasonable enquiry to ascertain authenticity of documents.
5. It is open to the respondent-BDA to solicit any information or documents from the side of the petitioner as are necessary for accomplishing the task mandated subject to the rider that no delay shall be brooked in that guise.
Costs made easy.
Sd/- JUDGE DS/-