High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri H Subramanya Bhatt vs The Commissioner on 15 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri H Subramanya Bhatt vs The Commissioner on 15 December, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
: VV  Kumarc-;. Park.Wé-zet,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 1531 DAY OF' DECEMBER 2008 

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J.GUI_\I,J§L;  ff_:~: "   M' V'
WRIT PETITION No.1 5861f2O§)8(BDA)-A.:":      

BETWEEN :

Sri.H.Subra:1:aanya Bhatt,

Aged about 62 years,  _ 

S /o.Late Ramakrishna Bhatt; 

R/at No.620, 4"! Cross,  ' ;

1stMain Road,   V

GangondanahaI1i,,    _,     
Nayandahalli Posfi, 51"' _. _     V " 
Bangalore-- 566)  »     ' ...PETI'I'IONER

(By   
M/'3_.Raju and  "

AND :
 
Baagalem. I)-e_3're.1i3g;n1.ent
Authofity, T; Chowgiaiah Road,

V Bangaloie -~:560""020. ...RESPONDENT

H K ‘ ‘e{By_.S1§i§K.Krishna, Adv.)

_fi%.”ms writ: petition is filed under Article 226 of the

V Coiistitution of Inciia with a prayer to direct the
L’ . a {L L «–_ ‘A ‘ respondent »– the Commissioner, Bangalore
Development Authority, T. Chowdaiah Road, Kumara

Park West, Bangalore to consider and dispose of the

representation dated 25.11.2002 vide Annexure ‘B’ tjo’-_

the Writ pefifion and also consider the case of ,
petitioner for allotment of alternative site as held ‘my. .ti1i’s t- e ”
Horfble Court in W.P.No.5356/2007, dated 03.f_)4..2QG7j”‘ ~
between Smt.Gee-tha V/S. Bangalore Develogimenté ‘
Authority, vide Annexure ‘E’ to tI1e_w1r’i_t pcztitiyonj
also consider the representation of the petitioner,’ as-in_L
the case of Aravind M.HonahaI1i and”=otl77~,_ers VISL

of Karnataka and others dated ‘
W.P.No. 17746] 2007 vide Annexure

This writ petition ,.–eomii1g~~ for
hearing, this day, the Cetirtrnade tft1e”fo_iioe.*ing:

to take
notice fer iii A i

2. eouriseiriforitifite’petitioner, to serve a set

of’ paperfiion him .

in the matter is listed for preliminary

L» it is taken up for final disposal.

* Thejietitiorier claims to have purchased site
of Sozinenahalli village pursuant to a registered

“xsjaie_,,d.eed dated 10.11.2000. The said site along with

“A19r.11.20{)i’?v: in’; ”

– 3 ..

other properties was acquired by the respondent for the
purpose of formafion of Sir M.\/ishweshwarsiah Layot£t.”»..

It is to be noticed that the acquisition A’
respect of the said layout has been V it 1
Court but however, with certain it
the petitioner has gven an i
for allotment- of an alternate
issued a notice to the 1′ to
produce certain docttmergt-s… has also

produced the 16.05.2005.

The grievaiicev even. as on today,
his reprcseragtiorl considered. Hence, this
writ petition. L V

V. ” were subject matter

of’:a— itfpetitioris and this Court in the case of

Aiothers V/S. Bangalore Development

i eti.;s§gt:m»~;tg”v:~épo:¢ed in 11.2 2005 KAR 608 has upheld

‘zicqiiisition proceedings. But however, has issued fl

T directions.

6. Consequently, petition stands disposed

directirlg the respondents to consider the ‘2 3

of the petitioner in the light of the obsewafiog ‘ 1

this Court in the aforesaid judgment;

Compliance in three months.

7. Mr.K.Krishna, legmed the
respondent is permitted ‘iii; — fi’I-e__ appearance
within four sd/…

Judge