IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.19924 OF 2019 (GM-SLUM) Between:
Sri. H. Subba Rao S/o. Sri. M.S. Hanumantha Rao, Aged about 86 years, R/at No.178A, 57th Cross, 4th Block, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560 010. ... Petitioner (By Sri. N.S. Bhat, Advocate) And:
1. The Commissioner, Karnataka Slum Clearance Board, Central Office, Risaldar Road, Sheshadripuram, Bengaluru – 560 020.
2. The Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru – 560 001. ... Respondents (By Sri. V. Shivareddy, HCGP) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 23.03.2013 vide Annexure-H and to pay compensation or an alternative site to the petitioner.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R Sri.N.S. Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri.V.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents.
2. Perused the petition. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner is seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider his representation at Annexure-H dated 23.3.2013.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted he be granted with a liberty to file a fresh representation to the competent authority. On the other hand, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents submitted that if such a representation is made by the petitioner, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation. In case a representation is made to respondent No.2, the same shall be decided by respondent No.2, by a speaking order, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such a representation.
6. It is needless to mention that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the petition.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RS/* Ct-sjk