IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.P.No.9092/2015 (BDA) BETWEEN :
SMT.USHA D., W/O K.MAHADEV, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.61, 1ST CROSS, 3RD MAIN, VINAYAKA NAGARA 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-560050 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI H.C.SUNDARESH, ADV.) AND :
THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE-560020 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI NARENDRA GOWDA, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE CANCELLATION ORDER DATED 27.04.2004 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-D.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner has challenged the cancellation order bearing No.BDA/COM SMVL II 2697/2/2003-04 dated 27.04.2004 issued by the respondent as per Annexure-D to the writ petition inter alia seeking a direction to the respondent to consider the representations filed by the petitioner dated 22.4.2008, 10.12.2010 and 05.03.2014 as per Annexures-‘H’, ‘J’ and ‘K’ respectively to the writ petition to accept the balance sital value from the petitioner with 21% interest p.a. and to execute the sale deed in respect of the site allotted as per the letter of allotment dated 16.04.2003 at Annexure-A to the writ petition.
2. The petitioner was allotted a site measuring 30 feet x 40 feet at Sri M.Visveshwaraya Layout after considering the seniority and number of attempts made by the petitioner for allotment of site. According to the allotment letter dated 16.04.2003, the petitioner was required to deposit the entire sital value within the stipulated time. However, the said balance amount was deposited by the petitioner belatedly through demand draft on 17.3.2004 in favour of the respondent. The respondent having received the said amount cancelled the site allotted in favour of the petitioner for non payment of sital value within the time prescribed. It transpires that the respondent has issued Circulars dated 18.10.2007 and 18.11.2010 extending the time to deposit the balance sital value up to 31.12.2010. Since the petitioner’s prayer is not considered in terms of the said Circulars, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel Sri.Sundaresha appearing for the petitioner placing reliance on the orders of this Court in W.P.No.15726/2013 (D.D.21.6.2013) as well as W.P.No.36787/2011 (D.D.7.12.2011) would submit that the respondent was obligated to consider the representations of the petitioner and receipt of interest @ 21% p.a. in terms of the Circular dated 18.10.2007 and 18.11.2010, but strangely passed the cancellation order of allotment which is contrary to the Circular instructions referred to above. Thus, learned counsel seeks to allow the writ petition in terms of the order passed in the cases referred as aforesaid.
4. Learned counsel Sri.Narendra Gowda appearing for the Bangalore Development Authority justifying the impugned order would submit that no balance sital value with interest was paid by the petitioner to avail the benefit of the Circulars referred to above.
5. Having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perusing the material on record, this court is of the view that it was obligatory on the part of the respondent to consider the representations filed by the petitioner to deposit the balance sital value with interest in terms of the Circulars dated 18.10.2007 and 18.11.2010. This Court in W.P.No.15726/2013 considering the identical issues directed the petitioner therein to pay the entire balance sital value with interest @ 21% p.a. to the Bangalore Development Authority within five weeks from the date of the order and on receipt of the said sale consideration, Bangalore Development Authority has been directed to execute the necessary documents in respect of the site allotted in favour of the petitioner. If the same is not available, it was observed that the petitioner may be allotted another site of equal dimension in any other layout which is subsequently formed by the Bangalore Development Authority. In the light of the said order, the petitioner is entitled to similar relief. Hence, the following: ORDER 1. The order of cancellation impugned herein at Annexure-D dated 27.4.2004 is quashed.
2. The petitioner is directed to pay the entire balance sital value with interest @ 21% p.a. from the date prescribed in the allotment letter to deposit balance sital value till the date of the deposit within six weeks from today.
3. On receipt of the sale consideration with interest of aforesaid, the Bangalore Development Authority shall execute the necessary documents in respect of the site allotted in favour of the petitioner. If the said site is not available for allotment, the Bangalore Development Authority shall allot any other alternative site of equal dimension in any other layout which is subsequently formed.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Dvr: