IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION Nos.19510-19512/2016 (LA-BDA) Between 1. Sri H L Sathyanarayana, S/o Narayanappa, Aged 75 years, R/o Kengeri Satelite Town, 2nd Main Road, Bangalore - 60 (Benefit of Senior Citizen not claimed) 2. Smt. Nalina W/o Y.E.Desikar, Aged 74 years, R/o Flat 001 AVG Palm Terraces, NO. 356/169, Dr. Vishnuvardhan Road, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore - 60.
3. Vinutha Srinivasan W/o Srinivasan, Aged 66 years, R/o 1372, 29th Main, 50th Cross, Poornapragna Nagara, Near Arehalli Arch, Uttarahalli, Bangalore-61. ... Petitioners (By Sri. R.Pramod, Advocate) And 1. The Commissioner Bangalore Development Authority, T.Chowdaiah Road, (Bellary Road) Bangalore - 560 020.
2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer Bangalore Development Authority, T.Chowdaiah Road, (Bellary Road) Bangalore - 560 020.
3. The Secretary State of Karnataka Urban Development Department Department of Revenue, Vidhan Soudha, Bangalore - 01. ... Respondents (By Sri. Gouthamdev C Ullal, Advocate for R1 & R2 Sri. Dildar Shiralli, HCGP for R3) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction as the may be in so far as the petitioners land are concerned and pleased to quash the preliminary notification dated 21.05.2008 issued under Section 17(1) and 3 of the BDA Act issued by the R-1 Annexure-A so far the petitioners site bearing number formed in survey number 28 of Krishnasagara Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk and etc., These Writ Petitions are coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioners who are the possible land losers are before this Court assailing the acquisition in question inter alia on the ground that they are the revenue site holders and in identical set of circumstances, the BDA has recommended to the Government some remedial measures and relaxation of acquisition.
2. After service of notice, the respondents have entered appearance; the State is represented by Sri. Dildar Shiralli, learned High Court Government Pleader. the Bangalore Development Authority and its Special Land Acquisition Officer are represented by Sri. Gouthamdev C Ullal, the learned panel counsel.
3. Although the Written Statement is filed taking up the contention resisting the writ petitions subsequently, the BDA has filed a Memo dated 10.10.2017 which reads as under:-
“In the above writ petition, the petitioner’s have sought for a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the Preliminary Notification dated: 21.05.2008 as per Annexure ‘A’ and the Final Notification dated:18.02.2010 as per Annexure ’B’ issued for the formation of ‘Nadaprabhu Kempegowda’ Layout in respect of site bearing Nos. 11, 12, 25 and 27 formed in Sy No.28 of K.Krishna Sagar Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. It is submitted that the property in question are revenue sites and accordingly, the respondent Bangalore Development Authority will recommend to the Government to delete the said revenue sites from the Acquisition proceedings subject to the requirement of the said sites for formation of road. An endorsement to that effect will be issued within a reasonable time. In view of the same, it is for the State Government to take appropriate action for deletion of the aforesaid revenue sites from Acquisition proceedings. The above information is submitted under the instructions of the Additional Land Acquisition Officer, BDA, Bangalore. Hence, it is prayed that the above writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the above, in the interest of justice.”
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that substantially the fact matrix of these writ petitions is similar to the one in the cognate W.P.Nos.37247-37263/2013 (LA-BDA) disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment dated 10.06.2014 at Annexure-J to the writ petitions and therefore, similar relief needs to be extended to the petitioners herein as well on the principle of parity and also in view of the stand of the BDA as reflected in the aforesaid memo.
5. In the aforesaid cognate writ petitions at paragraph-2 of its judgment, the Co-ordinate Bench has observed as under:-
“2. A perusal of the same indicates that the sites as claimed by the petitioners is recommended to be deleted from the acquisition proceedings. The respondents No.1 and 2 have also undertaken to issue an endorsement to that effect to the petitioners. In view of the recommendation made by the respondents No.1 and 2, the respondent No.3 would look into the same and take appropriate action in accordance with law.
In terms of the above and with a direction to the respondent No.3 to act upon the recommendation of the respondents No.1 and 2 in an expeditious manner, these writ petitions stand disposed of.”
6. In the above circumstances, these writ petitions succeed in part in terms of the observations made in the aforesaid judgment.; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the third respondent – Government to take a decision on the recommendation made by the first respondent-BDA for dropping the petition sites from the acquisition process within a period of three months and further, to inform the petitioners its result forthwith.
Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to come before the Court if the action of the State in contemplation turns out to be prejudicial to their interest.
Sd/- JUDGE RB