-1_
IN Tim men COURT ore’ KARNATAKA.
DATED Tms THE ms? DAY 01%’ SEPTEM$:ER.:V.2et)”1
BEFORE;
THE HON’BLE MR.JUs’I’IcI.:
WRIT PETITION No. 2.537%? oFVt2oo9:(mV1»”BDA)
BETWEEN: V t’
Sri. Ramesh Ramanujam V
Aged about 45 years,j” ~ if
S/0 Sri. K. R.a’IT:aI1ujam,g
Residing at-I ‘ K ‘ _
C/o Sri. R. S1,”-ikzimar, ”
No.1 1jo5[A’ §3.{_)ci;:;§, T:
‘
Bangalotje’-% 5639 ‘G92.’ ‘ -~ ” e ..PETI’}.’ION13:R
(By sri. D_S;41§sh:;’–A&v¢5éte)
V _ {X A. H ….. .. V
Development Authority
Constitutevd under Section 3 of the BDA
Act {Kamatiaka Act 12 of 1976}
Off”SaIa.key ‘Road,
Ku1nsa’a’:Park West,
V. — Bangalore – 560 020
” « _ ” Renresented by its
,COii*£IniSSi0ner. …RESPON DENT
” Sri. M.E.Arun,Ac1vocate)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to consider the case of
QR
‘rej’eoted.”_”_” ~ ._ ‘ ‘ ‘ it
IfM2IfM
the petitioner for allotment of an alternative site in any one
of the existing layouts and etc., a *
THIS PETITION COM1NG ON FOR PRL.HEgxIo:s:,o.’._i1%i’ .53.
GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE . ‘T
ORDER-‘
The petitioner lost his itf.ei11g«.
bearing No.7, measuring ‘VS’y:No.7′
at Ganigarapalya, U’ttz;irahaIIi” Batlgaloie South
Taluk, on its acquisitiozitifoiftjhe of road, {gas
received competisatio=n of In that View of
the inattei’;’t’i”the_V:”petitionerI cannot claim to have a
subsisting right o’fsa:1V”a11otment of a site in the layouts
fortifiedseby the ‘A1?;3V’sr1ge1:1ore Development Authority.
fi°’i5.e–.;5etition is Without merit and is, accordingly
In.
“T-