Karnataka High Court
Smt H Shameem Ajaz vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2021
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.39371/2011 (LB - BMP)
BETWEEN
SMT. H. SHAMEEM AJAZ,
SINCE DECEASED
REPRESENTED BY LRS.
KUM.SEERATH JEHAN,
D/O AZMATHULLA BAIG,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/O. NO.204/20, 5TH MAIN ROAD,
BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR I BLOCK,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
... PETITIONER
[BY SRI. B.N.SURESH BABU, ADVOCATE
(PHYSICAL HEARING)]
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S. BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
VISVESWARAYYA TOWERS, III FLOOR,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2
3. THE COMMISSIONER,
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
N.R. SQUARE,
BANGALORE.
4. THE ASST. REVENUE OFFICER,
(DOMLUR SUB DIVISION),
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING,
BANGALORE.
5. SMT.MUNIVENKATAMMA,
W/O LATE RAMAIAH,
RESIDING AT NO.2468/A,
2ND CROSS, BDA EXTENSION,
BANGALORE - 560 017.
... RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI.K.R.NITYANANDA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2
(PHYSICAL HEARING);
SRI.K.N.PUTTEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4;
SRI.P.D.SURANA, ADVOCATE FOR R5 (ABSENT)]
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS & QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 9.9.11, WHICH IS ULTIMATELY RESULTED
IN ISSUING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED
9.9.11 AT ANNEXURE - A PASSED BY THE R4; QUASH
THE IMPUGNED COMMUNICATIONS DATED 4.8.09,
ISSUED BY THE R1, TO THE R2 VIDE ANNEXURE - K AND
ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for
the following prayer:
"(a) Call for the relevant records and
quash the order dated 09-09-2011
which ultimately resulted in
issuing the impugned
endorsement dt 09-09-2011 in
No.DA/72/112/PR/25/2011-
2012 at Annexures A passed by
the 4th respondent;
(b) Issue a writ, order or directions in
the nature of CERTIORARI
quashing the impugned
LAQ 2007 dated 04.08.2009
issued by the 1st respondent to the
2nd respondent, vide Annexure K;
(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents 3 and 4 not to
revoke the khatas issued in
favour of the petitioners in respect
of the sites bearing Nos.123 in
Sy.Nos.66/5 of Domlur.
(d) Issue any other appropriate writ,
order or directions as this Hon'ble
court deems fit under the facts
and circumstances of the case, in
the interest of justice and equity."
2. This Court on 29.06.2021 passed the
following order:
Sri Surendra Babu, learned counsel for
petitioner and Smt.Nandini, learned counsel
on behalf of Sri K.N.Puttegowda for
Respondents 3 and 4 have appeared through
video conferencing.
Learned High Court Government
Pleader has appeared in person.
There is no representation on behalf of
Respondent No.5.
Counsel for petitioner submits that the
matter may be listed after four weeks.
List this matter after four weeks."
Again on 29.11.2021, this Court, awaiting the
appearance of the learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.5, passed the following order:
"The issue in the writ petition stands
completely covered by the order passed by a
Division Bench in writ appeal No.446/2020,
wherein, identical notices issued to one of the
petitioners which had been dismissed by a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court is set at
naught by the Division Bench in the aforesaid
writ appeal. The appellant in the writ appeal
is at serial No.147 in the very impugned order
in which, the petitioner is at serial No.123.
The order having been set aside by the
Division Bench, nothing further survives for
consideration at the hands of this Court in the
subject writ petition.
However, there is no representation on
behalf of respondent No.5, on both the
occasions i.e., in the forenoon and afternoon.
As a last chance, awaiting appearance
of the learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.5, list the matter on
08.12.2021. "
Even today, there is no representation on behalf of
respondent No.5. In the light of the earlier orders
passed on 29.11.2021, the matter is taken up in the
absence of the representation of respondent No.5. Since,
respondent No.5 has remained absent throughout as
aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is
heard. Sri. B.N. Suresh Babu, Sri. K.R. Nityananda,
learned AGA appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri.
K.N. Puttegowda, learned counsel appearing for
respondent Nos.3 and 4 were heard and the material on
record is perused.
3. Identical writ petitions were filed calling in
question the very same endorsements issued by the
BBMP in W.P.No.13427/2012 and connected cases
disposed on 20.02.2020.
4. In the said writ petitions, the petitioner by
name Robin D'cruz, whose name is found in the subject
impugned endorsement at Sl.No.147 was the petitioner
in W.P.No.39235/2011 dated 20.02.2020. A Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court allowed the writ petition and
directed action to be taken in terms of the judgment of
the Apex Court in HMT Societies case.
5. Robin D'cruz, who was the petitioner in the
aforesaid writ petition along with others called the said
order of the learned Single Judge in question before the
Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.446/2020. The
Division Bench, by its order dated 19.08.2021, allowed
the writ appeal, set aside the order passed by the
learned Single Judge and the endorsement dated
04.10.2011. The endorsement that is called in question
in the subject writ petition is also identical to the one
that is quashed by the Division Bench.
6. Therefore, on the orders passed by the
Division Bench quashing the said endorsement, in
which, one Robin D'cruz was also one of the appellant,
the petitioner will be entitled to the same relief as well,
as her name is found at Sl.No.123 of the same
endorsement issued by the BBMP. Therefore, in the
same terms and conditions as is directed by the
Division Bench, the writ petition also stands disposed.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SJK
