IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2931 DAY OF MAY 2009
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J.GUI§{iA1;«:'V: '
WRIT PETITION NO.1231:2']2~0Q§§(A}35Is{§1CiV': Ax
BETWEEN :
M / s.Sidda}i11geshWaraswamy L. 2 " .
Krupa 'I'raders, Merchafits,
N.R.Road, Davangere, V '
Rapresentt-3d by its
Pmpritztor, '- _ Q
s1~i.N.Ma11ana Gowgia, ; .
s A.
Aged about __49"'jg¢z}11ts', " _: .
R/0. Door No.2:';2}.~/2;"' » " .5 V
N.R.Road,-VD2iv*aI1gt2m. ' ...PE'1'ITIONI3R
{By sr1;R,L._?am;~%%Aa§. for
, 2M/S.'iPa_tAi1 & Patil)
1v.{ark_eE'.3ng.~ Committee,
Davangere,
V x By it$_.f?}ec1*ctary.
' Ag'r1cuItura1 Marketing,
__ ? Bangalore. . . .RESPONDEN'FS
(By Sr1.H.K.Th1mmegowda, Adv. for R1,
Sr1.H.K.Basavaraju, PICGP for R2)
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 ef the .,
Censtitution of India with a prayer to quash _
dated 4.11.2008, passed by the respondent marked as --
Annexure ‘G’ to the Writ petition. V –. ‘-
This writ petition coming Tier
hearing, this day, the made the_f($11ow’in»g;e’ . 2
ORDER?”
Court
Government Pleader amepffs fiirvvfeependent No.2.
2. ::«’,_’1ea_med ceunsel is
directed .tG”‘t.1i§§3j;;i<;fi§:e respondent No.1.
3. for the petitioner, to
V serve 4;-ga’ Set, of papers on them.
‘ V’ the matter is listed for preliminaxy
heeiflfig, it is taken up for final disposal.
a 1″t. is the case of the petitioner that he was
a site bearing No.3–155, measuring 45′ x 120′
” the 13* respondent and possessien certificate was
aleo issued on 25.1 1.1997. A lea.se–cum-sale ageement
~oC–W
T “‘–4:wV}:5etitioner submits that the site allotted by the
-3-
was executed in respect of the site in favour of the
on 03.04. 1998.
petitioner It appears, the
.~’33’d
respondent, by a circular dated 1 1.04.2003
upon the respective Committees to forfeit M
site and submit a report. Thereaftciifttie file?
passed a resolution dated 29.(}8.2Ot§8A A.forfeit__t1f1e ”
allotted and the same was’V”=;appmved_V_ mint’
respondent on 01.10.20’§}8«_. to the
order dated 04.11.2008, has forfeited
the site of the 13?f’V~’34t’1Vt§rv¢’1v’IV1~’.”.r;.:-_ Questimvnet :”t’ Arne said forfeiture
this
€>._ WIVten theV’ma’£ter.e_”-is taken up, iearned counsel
$01′ the ;yeti..t.ioI1er as well as the respondents
tvtmbxiiitee ‘-subject matter of this writ petition is
fi1!1’ng of this Court in a batch of writ
%t – .. 4, _’ ‘petitioxaat “1.
‘7’. Mr.R.L.Pat:i1, learned counsel appearing for the
J;
K
Agricultural Produce Market Committee cannot
identified.
8. Mr.H.K.’Fhimmegowda, learned t}:”1ed ”
13* respondent submits that they I.’ T
allotted to the petitioner.
9. Apparently, in Jidentieai ttie”imp:ugned
forfeiture order is quashed is remitted to
the Agriculture} for fresh
eonsideratioo. _’31;ii” ‘i*:oW’eSj(-e’f,* present case, the
questioii-__of »t.14if£e__:ii3::~ttiier to the 15* respondent
and v.t1te1_ede._te.:_”.i*eeonsider the ease of the
would be an exercise in futility.
V.”-,I;’:1rjVeed_, cases, I have ruled that if some time
is tej__ti1e allottee to put up eonstruction and if
‘the eaid_v’eonst:1’uetion is not put up within the said time
“the order of ferfeiture wouid stand revived.
10. Hence the following order is passed:
(3) The 13* respondent is gamed a week’s time
from the date of receipt of a copy of the order to
identify the site allotted to the petitioner.
\§sb
(b)O13 such identificatien, the petitioner is g’ar.1f€d
a year’s time to put up c0nst111cti0I1:..__”EfV¥;’.,
censtruction is not put up within ‘
order of forfeiture would revivedf . ‘
Writ Petitioix stands A
10. sri H.K.Basavarag1i, :%¢g.mea% fact}?
for mspofident No.2 f1flé;”‘I13:3i:11o of
appearance within four Weeks.’
11;’ “”” ‘:1; learned counsel
appeazcinvyg for 1. is permitted to file his
power the four Weeks.
Sd/*9
Judgfé