Smt V M Geetha vs The Commissioner
2024 Latest Caselaw 27303 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt V M Geetha vs The Commissioner on 13 November, 2024

                                                -1-
                                                           NC: 2024:KHC:46067
                                                         WP No. 20978 of 2023




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

                                             BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 20978 OF 2023 (BDA)
                      BETWEEN:

                      SMT. V.M. GEETHA,
                      W/O SRI. BASAVARAJ ETAGI,
                      AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
                      R/AT NO.15, ASHIRWAD,
                      KOTHANUR MAIN ROAD,
                      5TH MAIN, ADITHYA NAGARA,
                      ANJANAPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH,
                      BENGALURU - 560 062.
                                                                ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT VAJRALLI, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by   AND:
SHARMA ANAND
CHAYA
Location: High        THE COMMISSIONER,
Court of Karnataka
                      BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
                      T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
                      KUMAR PARK (WEST),
                      BENGALURU - 560 018.
                                                               ...RESPONDENT
                      (BY SRI. AJAYKUMAR M., ADVOCATE)

                          THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
                      THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
                      RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO ALLOT THE SITE IN FAVOUR OF
                      THE PETITIONER AND REGISTER THE SAME WITHIN TIME
                      FRAME PERIOD AND ETC.

                           THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
                      IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
                      UNDER:
                                -2-
                                              NC: 2024:KHC:46067
                                          WP No. 20978 of 2023




CORAM:     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

                         ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is the

owner of the land bearing site No.16, Katha No.45, Assessment

No.28/2 situated at Gidadakonenahalli Village, Yeshwanthpura

Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk and petitioner has purchased the

same as per registered sale deed dated 12.12.2002 (Annexure-

A).

3. It is stated in the writ petition that land in question

which has been purchased by the petitioner as per Annexure-A

is the subject matter of the acquisition proceedings as per the

Final Notification dated 09.09.2003 passed by the respondent-

BDA. It is also stated in the petition that respondent-BDA has

agreed to allot an alternative site in terms of the judgment of

this Court in the case of "Junjamma and Others vs. The

Bangalore Development Authority reported in ILR 2005

KAR 608.

4. In this background of the aspects, it is argued by

Sri.Bhat Ganapathi Vajralli, learned counsel appearing for the

NC: 2024:KHC:46067

petitioner by referring to the note sheets of respondent-BDA at

Annexures- H & K and submitted that, BDA has intend to allot

site bearing No.1451 of Sir M Vishveshwaraiah Badavane 6,

Block, measuring 30 x 50 as per Annexure-H, in view of the

fact that the petitioner herein has lost the land insofar as the

notification said to have been issued by respondent-BDA by

acquiring the same. Accordingly, he sought for direction to

respondent-BDA to allot the site as per Annexure-K to the writ

petition.

5. Per contra, Sri.Ajay Kumar, learned counsel

appearing for respondent-BDA submitted that petitioner herein

is the purchaser of the revenue site, which is the subject

matter of the land acquired for the purpose of

Sir M Vishveshwaraiah layout and therefore, he submitted that

though the note sheet as per Annexure-H specifies the site

No.1451, however, the dimension of the said site is 30 x 50

and therefore, in the event if the said site is allotted in favour

of the petitioner, the same shall runs contrary to the judgment

of this Court in the case Junjamma supra and accordingly, he

submitted that there is no impediment for the respondent-BDA

NC: 2024:KHC:46067

to allot an alternative site measuring 30 x 40, in terms of the

judgment of this Court in the case of Junjamma supra.

6. In the light of the submission made by the learned

counsel for the parties, though I find force in the submission

made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that

the note sheet at Annexures-H and K which specifies the

allotment of site No.1451 of Sir M Vishveshwaraiah layout

which is vacant and is to be allotted in favour of the petitioner,

however, since the petitioner being the purchaser of the

revenue site and therefore, in terms of judgment of this Court

in the case Junjamma (supra), the respondent-BDA is directed

to allot an alternative site in terms of the judgment of this

Court referred to above in the case of Junjamma and take

decision in the matter within an outer limit of two months from

the receipt of this order.

With the above observations, writ petition is disposed

of.

SD/-

(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE GPG CT: BHK