.~..5NDA_~.~3.[
I
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THES THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2009
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE2 MR. JUSTICE A s 3o?AN15;Af .
WRIT PETYPION NO22455 OF 2009 (I{£.R.f_12'i;?._:/SIVJ_'I§v)E"' E L
BETWEEN :
MOHANLAL.D.'}'HAKUR s/0 DHARMAQAs.,V_ k - .
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, CORPORATION. ROAD; '
TIPFUR-572201,
TUMKUR DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ms (ma HOLDER'
MRS.1\EEE'I'Hr'a- EM;-DUSi§.~,IA' -
DAUGHTER OF 3w€O.§iANLA._L"D_.TH:\KUR
' " PETITIONER
(BY SR: K. s..,NARAYAN'Aj-SWAMY, ADV)
1~ TEE 'SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
' BANGALORE} URBAN 13:37, BANGALORE
2 ' COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION
BAZVEALORE
TAHSILDAR,
' YELAHANKA,
BANGALORE ... RESPONDENTS
:f'(B’:’ SR1 R B SATHYANARAYANA SINGH, HCGP)
$
‘1
2
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIEIER THE
REPRESENTATION DTD 21.6.08 VIDE ANNEX-F WHERE
UNDER HE SOUGHT FOR MEASUREMENT OF THE LAND
AND FIX THE BOUNDARIES IN RESPECT OF’ SY.NQ_.14
MEASURING 4 ACRES 03 GUNTAS OF NELAKLINTE
VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK,_
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK AND ETC. _ _
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRE1;1w:iI§N.ARY’ _
HEARING THIS DAY, THE comm’ MA1:>.eTHE’§*GLLQw1VNVe; ‘
ORDER.”
The learned Government Aciirecéite to I
for respexldexits ufile.»meme”‘Vef”:appearance within a
period 0I”>f01″jI_” xveeieé
I’I’I”2e pétmne; is seeking for issue of writ: of
tfdjreet the respondems to consider the
‘rep:feSenV1:;iIgi?§;1V.’:i§Ited 2 1.06.2008 which is at Almexure
_ to The
3. The petitioner claime that he has purehaseci the
;’p:’operty bearing Sy.No.};4 measuring 4 acres 8 games
J
‘l
3
of Neiiukunte Vfllage, Jala Hobli, Devanahafli Taluk,
under a registered sale deed dated 08.06.1984.
Thereafter, the petitioner is said to have secured the
revenue entries in his name.
4. The present g’ievance_;hof_v_veve1″ iithaifizi the ” ”
bcundafies in respect of the pr0pVe–.1fty;’_is~ Tf
in ‘£1113 regard, though repreSe_fit;;1tioIie haVeT”bee,11-vmade
to the respondente, the, same }.1aVfs’ze_ net beer1–.cQ1j1siidered
in a.ccc:r:i’da1i_Aeej.5’V_xar;iVtVh .. and has also not been
responded _tI1eV..reé§p0V_r;vde£1t”s. The iearned ceunsei for
the petitio.ner’a}$0’1’efer*3 fie the East of the representation
iafllicfz ‘F’ to indicate that even from the
A13st*-[{:_§f .1tE;e”‘repi:’eeentation, nearly a year has lapsed, but
V _ the respericiehts have not acted upon the same.
r The immed Gevemment Advocate would
:V’i::eC§ieate £113.: the I’6S§301’id€I1’CS weuid have to verify the
«~ C§()CL1}3Cl€}’1tS and thereafter take action in accordance
J;
‘Iv
4
with law and such action would be initiated in
accordance with law and the petitioner would be made
known of the further proceedings. ._
6. In the light of what has been co11tended,it”‘is
unnecessary to refer to the details of the ”
petitioner. The question at present is i
represerztation of the petitioner tolfee :c.oi1eide’f’ed–:for: c
purpose of fixing the bmindarie-s__ of iI’1§”‘1V’)1″0}f3€’..i”‘I’i’_}”‘3I
regard, had made repeated
represerxtatioiis of it was filed before the
first responzieiitwofi’ 2.i.{)e.2008. There is nothing on
.t<i"'ii1'2c:iiee.te the said representation has been
eo:_1eidere?i'«d'isp0sed of one way or the other.
'<3'. 'lfieiiee, £1 direction is issued to the respondent
",Nfe".£se–.te eensider the case of the petitioner in accordance
in order to hasten the precess, the petitioner
" '@*az1ted liberty of filing a. fresh representation aloeg
i»
As,
5
with a certified copy of this order. On receipt of the
representation, the third respondent shall} take
immediate’ steps to verify the records and notify such
other persons if necessary and thereafter, considerstid
dispose of the said representation expeditiouslfi”‘1:$:’:t—-:ir1i.: .
any event, not later than four mo:r1t1f1>s fi”o*r11″i:1o:jeVv of ‘4 ” =
filing a fresh representation.
In terms of the above, the ,
of. No c:>_rder’to _e{€:sts.4v’ ‘ I
Sd/i
Iilékgfs