Karnataka High Court
Smt Jabeen Gafoor vs Bengaluru Development Authority on 9 February, 2023
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
-1-
WP No. 15649/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 15649 OF 2021 (BDA)
BETWEEN:
SMT. JABEEN GAFOOR,
W/O SYED ABDUL GAFOOR ,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT NO.35, 4TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN,
SUDAMA NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 027.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAVEED AHMED.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.,
KUMARA PARK WEST,
Digitally
BENGALURU-560 020.
signed by
CHETAN B C
REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
Location: ...RESPONDENT
HIGH COURT
OF (BY SRI.SURAJ PATIL .,ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT
THE RESPONDENT TO ALLOT ALTERNATE SITE TO THE
PETITIONER AS PER REPRESENTATION DTD.6.11.2019 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
WP No. 15649/2021
ORDER
The grievance of the Petitioner is as to non-allotment
of alternate site, since the one allotted earlier having been
set at naught in W.P.No.8475/2015. Learned counsel for
the Petitioner submits that it was fault on the part of the
BDA in allotting a site that would suffer voiding at the
hands of this Court and therefore, they should now at least
allot an alternate site the amount having been already
received by the BDA way back in the year 2004.
2. Learned Panel Counsel appearing for the
respondent - BDA opposes the Writ Petition contending
that there are as many as 30 such cases and all those
cases need to be bunched in order of seniority, availability
& logistics, etc., and have to be worked out for making
allotment of the alternate sites, of course, subject to
availability of the same and therefore, it would take some
time.
WP No. 15649/2021
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the Petition papers, this Court is
inclined to grant indulgence as under and for the following
reasons:
(a) The BDA having been established under the
provisions of Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976,
acquires private property for the formation of public
layouts so that, the sites can be allotted to the deserving
& needy. Such allotment was made in favour of the
Petitioner on 09.02.2005 and the Registered Sale Deed
evenly dated was also granted. However, the allotment of
the site having been set at naught, as already mentioned
above by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP
No.9475/2015 vide judgment dated 18.07.2019, the
Respondent - BDA is duty bound to make arrangement
for the grant of alternate site. This has not been done till
date and there is enormous delay which is not being
plausibly explained despite solicitation.
WP No. 15649/2021
(b) Learned counsel for the petitioner is more than
justified in contending that his client cannot put to the
vagaries of the BDA and its officials in taking a decision as
to the grant of alternate site and therefore, there should
be a direction to them to allot a site on war footing
considering their seniority, logistics and availability etc.,
In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed in
part; the Respondent - BDA is directed to allot an
alternate site in favour of the Petitioner in accordance with
the extent norms within an outer limit of six months. If
delay is brooked, in addition to amounting to contempt of
the Court, the officials responsible for brooking delay shall
be personally liable for making payment of Rs.2,000/- per
day on an application being moved by the Petitioner.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Bsv
