Karnataka High Court

Raghavendra C vs The Commissioner Bangalore ... on 25 July, 2024

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: Krishna S Dixit, M.Nagaprasanna

                                            -1-
                                                    NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB
                                                     WP No. 4809 of 2024




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

                                          PRESENT
                       THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
                                            AND
                       THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
                       WRIT PETITION NO. 4809 OF 2024 (LA-BDA)


               BETWEEN:

               RAGHAVENDRA C.,
               S/O CHANDRASHEKAR B.V.,
               AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
               FLAT 313, SRILAKSHMI ENCLAVE
               SRIRAMPURA PHASE II
               RACHENAHALLI
               THANISANDRA
               BENGALURU NORTH - 560 064.
                                                            ...PETITIONER
               (BY SRI RAKESH B. BHATT, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
NAGAVENI            AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA           1. THE COMMISSIONER
                     BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
                     T.CHOUDAIAH ROAD
                     KUMARA PARK WEST
                     BENGALURU - 560 020.

               2.    THE COMMITTEE
                     BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
                     T.CHOUDAIAH ROAD
                     KUMARA PARK WEST
                                    -2-
                                               NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB
                                                WP No. 4809 of 2024




    BENGALURU - 560 020.
                                                     ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, AAG A/W

    SRI SHIVAPRASAD M.SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER PETITIONER'S
APPLICATION SEEKING ALLOTMENT OF SITE AT SHIVARAM
KARANTH LAYOUT (ANNEXURE-F AND G).


    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
M.NAGAPRASANNA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
            and
            HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA


                            ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

Heard Sri Rakesh B Bhatt, learned counsel appearing for

petitioner, Sri Vikram Huilgol, learned Additional Advocate

General along with Sri Shivaprasad M. Shantanagoudar,

learned counsel appearing for respondents/Bangalore

Development Authority ('BDA' for short).

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

2. The petitioner is said to be holder of revenue sites

bearing Nos.12 and 13 of Kalatammanahalli village,

Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, which came to be

acquired for formation of Dr. Shivaramakaranth Layout. The

petitioner though seeks consideration of his representations

submitted on 14-03-2023 and 15-12-2023 seeking allotment of

site pursuant to the orders of the Apex Court, the issue would

be entitlement of the petitioner for the relief qua the sites he

had held.

3. The learned counsel appearing for BDA Sri Shivaprasad

M. Shantanagoudar submits that the Apex Court has considered

the grievances of the revenue site holders in the layout formed

in Dr. Shivaramakaranth Layout.

4. The Apex Court, in its order dated 05-05-2021,

answering Miscellaneous Application Nos.1614-1616 of 2019

notices the affidavit filed by the BDA in respect of previous

layouts formed by the BDA in which purchasers of revenue sites

in those layouts have been permitted to apply for allotment of

sites measuring 30x40'. The Apex Court observes as follows:

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

".... .... ....

(4) In our Order dated 18.03.2021, we had observed as under:

"It appears that certain persons belonging to poor and middle-income groups have purchased house sites from the land owners whose lands have been notified for the acquisition for the formation of the lay-out in question, prior to the date of the judgment dated 03.08.2018. We are of the view that their grievances also require to be redressed. we are informed that similar grievances of the purchasers of the sites in other layouts formed by the Bangalore Development Authority have been redressed by the Bangalore Development Authority. The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, is directed to place on record the mode and manner of redressal of the grievances of such site-holders adopted by the Bangalore Development Authority in the previously formed lay-outs within a period of four weeks from today."

(5) In compliance of the above order, the Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority (B.D.A.), has filed an affidavit dated 12.04.2021 stating that in respect of the previous lay-outs formed by the B.D.A. such as Anjanapura Layout, sir M. Vishweshwaraiah Layout, Banashankari 6th Stage layout, the purchasers of the revenue sites in those lay-outs have been permitted to apply for allotment of sites measuring 30 ft. x 40 ft. even though the sites purchased by them are bigger in dimension. The affidavit also indicates the other conditions based on which the sites were allotted to the revenue site holders.

(6) In consideration of the above, we are of the view that the purchasers of sites in Dr. Shivaram Karanth Layout are entitled for allotment of sites provided that their purchase of such sites is prior to the date of the judgment i.e. 03.08.2018.

(7) The purchasers of the sites in Dr. Shivaram Karanth Layout are permitted to get themselves registered in the B.D.A. as applicants for allotment of sites under the Bangalore Development Authority

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

(Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 ("B.D.A. Allotment of Site Rules") within 4 months from today.

(8) These purchasers should not he owning any other residential property in Bangalore and surrounding vicinity. They shall be bound by all the other terms and conditions for allotment of sites as per the B.D.A. Allotment of Site Rules.

(9) The General Power of Attorney holders and persons having an Agreement to Sell are not entitled for allotment of the sites.

(10) Purchasers of sites, through registered sale deeds, prior to 03.08.2018, are alone entitled for allotment of sites as per this order.

(11) The B.D.A. shall calculate the compensation payable to the applicants in respect of their acquired sites and give credit accordingly by adjusting the same towards the allotment price for the sites to be allotted and call upon the applicants to pay the balance, if any.

(12) The allotment of sites is restricted to sites measuring 30 ft. x40 ft. being the maximum extent irrespective of the measurement of their sites that have been acquired by the B.D.A.

(13) The applicants have to withdraw the cases filed by them, if any, challenging the acquisition of their lands, before filing an application with the B.D.A. in terms of this order

(14) The purchasers of the sites are permitted to apply for allotment of sites to the B.D.A. along with self- certified photocopy of the title deeds on or before 17.09.2021. It is clarified that they need not pay the initial deposit. The documents submitted by the applicants along with their applications for allotment of sites in terms of this order shall be referred by the Commissioner, B.D.A., to a committee of retired District Judges comprising of a Chairman and two Members. The Committee so appointed shall examine the title deed of the applicants and submit a report as to the ownership of the sites to the Commissioner, B.D.A. The rival claim(s), if any, shall also be decided by the committee. The B.D.A.

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

would allot sites only to those applicants who are duly certified by this Committee as the owners, subject to their satisfying other conditions of this order."

The Apex Court, in terms of the aforesaid order, directed

constitution of a Committee to go in the issue of revenue site

holders. In furtherance of the direction so issued, Bopaiah

Committee is constituted to specifically go into the issue of the

revenue site holders and their respective claim.

5. In the light of the direction by the Apex Court as

quoted supra, and the constitution of the Bopaiah Committee,

the petitioner will have to be relegated to appear before the

Committee, as in terms of the said order, it is for the

Committee to decide the grievance of the petitioner and answer

the same. In that light, we are of the considered view that this

petition could be disposed, with a direction to the Committee to

consider the grievance of the petitioner - revenue site holder

and redress the same.

6. The learned counsel for the BDA submits that several

applications are pending before the Committee and there are

several applications to be placed before the Committee, they

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

could be of the notification of the year 2018 or 2022. In that

light, we deem it appropriate to direct the BDA to consider the

grievances of those persons i.e., the revenue site holders, by

the Committee, notwithstanding the fact that they are

petitioners before the Court or otherwise. It is also necessary

for the BDA to notify that the Committee is taking up the

applications of the revenue site holders by giving adequate

publicity.

7. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

(a) The petition stands disposed.

(b) The petitioner is relegated to appear before the

Committee qua his grievances.

(c) The BDA shall, within one (1) week from the

date of receipt of the copy of this order, notify

to the general public, both in print and

electronic media to sensitize the applicants who

are revenue site holders in

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

Dr.Shivaramakaranth Layout, to submit their

applications before the Bopaiah Committee.

(d) The BDA shall grant four (4) weeks time on and

from the date of such notification/publication, in

both print and electronic media.

(e) All applications concerning 2018 notification or

2022 notification shall bear consideration at the

hands of the BDA.

(f) The Committee is at liberty to take assistance of

experts from the BDA to resolve the grievances

of the applicants.

(g) The Committee is granted three (3) months

time from the last date indicated in terms of

clause (d) supra i.e., the last date for receipt of

the applications from the applicants - revenue

site holders, to resolve the dispute, strictly in

consonance with law.

NC: 2024:KHC:29254-DB

(h) The resolution of the dispute in the form of a

report, be placed before us on the expiry of

three (3) months.

(i) The grievance of the petitioner also shall bear

consideration at the hands of the Committee

like all the other applications that would bear

consideration, as observed hereinabove.

(j) Till the Committee decides on the applications of

the respective applicants, status quo, qua the

property, be maintained by the parties.

Ordered accordingly.