IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.26531 OF 2018 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:
Sri Ranganathaiah S/o Chikkachennaiah, Kengal Kempohalli Village, Sompura HObli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore Rural District.
(By Sri. T. Sheshagiri Rao, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Department of Industries and Commerce, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Vikasa Soudha, Bengaluru.
2. Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, Represented by its Secretary, No.49, Khanija Bhavana, East Wing, 5th Floor, Racecourse Road, Bengaluru - 560 001 …Petitioner 3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, No.49, Khanija Bhavana, East Wing, 5th Floor, Racecourse Road, Bengaluru - 560 001 … Respondents (By Sri. E. S. Indiresh, AGA) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to consider the representation issued by the petitioner dated 10.05.2018 and consequently, issue necessary direction to the respondents to grant the statutory benefit in allotting the developed sital area in favour of the petitioner in terms of Government notification dated 02.04.2008 as found at Annexure-E.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri. T. Sheshagiri Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. E. S. Indiresh, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 3.
Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No.2.
2. 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 inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 10.05.2018 vide Annexure-A.
4. 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.3 to consider the representation dated 10.05.2018 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.3 submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law, if not already decided.
6. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the 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.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-