Karnataka High Court
Sri D Mohammed Pakruddin vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 September, 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.BILLAPPA
WRIT PETITION No.26151/2013 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
Sri.D.Mohammed Pakruddin,
S/o.Said Davud Sabi,
Aged 85 years,
Razackpalya, Bagalpur Post,
Bangalore North Taluk,
Bangalore. ...Petitioner
(By Sri.R.P.Somashekaraiah, Adv.,)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Represented by its Secretary,
Revenue Department,
M.S.Building,
Bangalore-560001.
2. The Special Deputy Commissioner,
Bangalore North Division,
Bangalore-560009.
3. The Tahasildhar,
Bangalore North Addl. Taluk,
Yelahanka, Bangalore North Taluk,
Bangalore-560063. ...Respondents
2
(By Smt.M.C.Nagashree, GP)
*******
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the R3 to take necessary steps to carry the Phodi work in respect of land bearing No.72 of Huttanahalli, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore by considering the representation dated 29.11.12 under Annx-E. This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in B Group this Day, the Court delivered the following:-
J U D G M E NT In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for writ of mandamus directing the third respondent to effect phodi in respect of Sy.No.72 of Huttanahalli village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk.
2. The petitioner claims that he is a grantee of 4 acres of land in Sy.No.72 of Huttanahalli village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk vide grant certificate No.ND/CR/1/1716/61-62 dated 18.9.1962. The petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the land. The petitioner requested the third respondent vide Annexure-E, to effect 3 phodi. The third respondent has not taken any action.
Therefore, this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the request of the petitioner to effect phodi has not been considered. Therefore, the third respondent may be directed to consider the request of the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the application is not in proper form. If the petitioner fulfills necessary conditions his request will be considered in accordance with law.
5. The petitioner claims that he is granted 4 acres of of land in Sy.No.72 of Huttanahalli village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The petitioner has requested to effect phodi as per Annexure-E. The third respondent being the concerned authority ought to have considered the request of the petitioner. Therefore, it is necessary to direct the third respondent to consider the request of the petitioner. 4
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the third respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioner as per Annexure-E within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall pay the necessary charges and fulfill conditions required to effect phodi.
SD/-
JUDGE SM