IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION Nos.21110 – 21111/2019 (GM – RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI KESHAV L S/O LAKSHMAN NAIK R/AT NO.211, HUCHAVANAHALLI NEAR PUDIYAMMA TEMPLE HIRIYUR TALUK-577598 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 2. SRI SURESH NAIK S/O LAKSHMAN NAIK NOW R/AT NO.211, HUCHAVANAHALLI NEAR PUDIYAMMA TEMPLE HIRIYUR TALUK-577598 CHITRADUGA DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI KALEEMULLAH SHARIFF, ADV.) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA-577501 2. THE BRANCH OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, CHITRADURGA-577501 3. THE SECRETARY KIADB, BENGALURU-560002 4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER KIADB, BENGALURU-560002 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONERS DTD 09.08.2014 VIDE ANNX-E AND THE REPRESENTATIONS DTD 16.10.2016, DTD 10.02.2017 AND 20.06.2018 VIDE ANNX-C TO C2 RESPECTIVELY.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Sri.Kaleemullah Shariff, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
The petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia have prayed for the following reliefs:
“i) Direct the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 9.08.2014 produced at Annexure-E and the representations dated 16.10.2016, dated 10.02.2017 and 20.6.2018, produced at Annexures ‘C’ to ‘C2’ respectively by issuing a writ of mandamus.
ii) Direct the 1st respondent to grant the sites, wherein the petitioners have put up construction and regularize the construction by issuing writ of mandamus.”
3. When the matters were taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the writ petitions may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representations dated 9.08.2014 submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioners shall be dealt with in accordance with law, if not already decided.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioners, if not already decided, in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ln.