Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Concorde International Hotels Pvt ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 September, 2019

Author: Aravind Kumar

Bench: Aravind Kumar

                           1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 06th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

           W.P.NO.50374/2018 (KLR-RR/SUR)


BETWEEN:

M/S CONCORDE INTERNATIONAL
HOTELS PVT LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT 1956
OFFICE AT NO.134, HAL AIRPORT
ROAD, KODIHALLI, BENGALURU-560017
REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
MR. JOHN MATHEW.
                                       ... PETITIONER

(BY SMT. SUSHEELA S, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
    SRI. T.R.RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
       REVENUE DEPARTMENT
       M.S. BUILDING
       BANGALORE-560 001.

2.     THE TAHSILDAR
       BANGALORE NORTH ADDL.
       TALUK, YELAHANKA
       BANGALORE-560 063.
                                     .. RESPONDENTS
       (BY SRI.Y.D. HARSHA, AGA)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING
                                 2

TO    DIRECT   THE    R-2   TO    CONSIDER   THE
REPRESENTATION DATED 20.11.2017 AND 14.06.2018
VIDE ANNEXURE-N, P AND Q TO RECTIFY THE REVENUE
ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.101 TO AN EXTENT OF 4
ACRES 37 GUNTAS BY DELETING THE NAME OF
GOVERNMENT AND ORDER NO.269/LRM/77 AND
GOVERNMENT RD NO.269/LRM/77 2, IN COLUMN NO.9
AND 11 OF RTC IN RESPECT OF 4 ACRES 37 GUNTAS
ONLY AND INSERT THE NAME OF PETITIONER HEREIN.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                          ORDER

Petitioner has sought for the following relief;

"(i) Issue writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the representations dated 20.11.2017, 04.01.2018 and 14.06.2018 vide Annexure- N, P & Q to rectify the revenue entries in respect of Sy.No.101 to an extent of 4 Acres 37 guntas by deleting the name of Government and orders No.269/LRM/77 AND Government RD No.269/LRM/77 2, in column No.9 and 11 of RTC in respect of 4 Acres 37 guntas only and insert the name of petitioner herein."

contending interalia that an extent of 4 Acres 37 guntas in Sy.No.101 situated at Shettigere Village, Jala Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk now Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore District, had been converted to non- agricultural industrial purposes way back in year 1972 3 i.e., on 14.12.1972 vide Annexure-F and while seeking permission for change of land use from agriculture to commercial purposes petitioner had been directed by authorities to produce RTC extracts in respect of Sy.No.101 and on obtaining the same it was noticed that in the Cl.No.10 and 11, name of the Government has been depicted and for rectifying the error representations had been submitted by petitioner on 20.11.2017, 04.01.2018 and 14.06.2018 vide Annexures- N, P & Q and said representations have not been considered. As such, direction by way of writ of mandamus is sought for by the petitioner.

2. However, during the pendency of present petition Special Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk, Yelahanka in Dgï.Dgï.n/(eÁ)«ªÁzÀ/¹.Dgï/474/18-19 dated 06.02.2019 vide Annexure-R has been examined the claim of petitioner and by said order has deleted the entry-

"Government" as reflected in RTC extracts and inserted "Land Converted" (NAK). This would clearly indicate 4 that prayer of petitioner has been addressed to by the Special Tahsildar, Yalahanka Taluk, Yelahanka. In that view of the matter, present petition stands disposed of by placing said order on record.

3. Petitioner would be at liberty to prosecute their claim for change of land use by pursuing their claim, which is now pending before appropriate Government. However, no opinion is expressed with regard to said application or merits of said application.

Ordered accordingly.

I.A.No.1/18 dismissed as not pressed. I.A.No.1/19 stands disposed of in view of the petition having been disposed of on merits.

SD/-

JUDGE RU