IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.40306/2017 (LA - UDA) BETWEEN:
SRI M.C.BASAVARAJU S/O LATE CHANNAMALLAPPA, AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O NO.47/150, P.W.D.QUARTERS, P.W.D. COLONY, COURT ROAD, CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT – 571 313.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI NAGARAJ R.C., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY, NO.301, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BHAVAN, B.R.HILLS ROAD, CHAMARAJANAGAR – 571 313.
…RESP0NDENTS (BY SRI E.S.INDIRESH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI A.V.GANGADHARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R2 TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATION AT ANNEXURE – A, DATED 08.11.2016 TO PAY COMPENSATION FOR DEMOLITION OF HIS HOUSE AND FOR ACQUISITION OF SITE BEARING NO.1, ASSESSMENT NO.179/179/A, MEASURING 1760 SQ.FT., SITUATED AT GALIPURA LAYOUT, WITHIN THE LIMITS OF CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL DIVISION ‘A’ AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri Nagaraj R.C., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri E.S.Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1.
Sri A.V.Gangadharapa, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a writ of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 08.11.2016 vide Annexure-A.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 08.11.2016 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner 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, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner, 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, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE PB