Karnataka High Court
Smt Anitha Mahesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 April, 2023
Author: Krishna S Dixit
Bench: Krishna S Dixit
-1-
WP No. 4364 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 4364 OF 2022 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. ANITHA MAHESH,
W/O SRI MAHESH,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT NO.299, D SUBBAIAH ROAD,
CHAMRAJ MOHALLA, MYSURU-570 024.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.GANAPATHY BHAT.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
Digitally signed BENGALURU-560 001.
by SHARADA
VANI B 2. THE MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Location: HIGH AUTHORITY (MUDA)
COURT OF CHAMRAJAPURA,
KARNATAKA
JHANSI RANI LAKSHMI BAI ROAD,
CHAMARAJAPURAM, MOHALLA,
LAKSHMIPURAM, MYSURU-570 005.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R SRINIVASA GOWDA., AGA FOR R1;
SRI.SIDDARTHA H M., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
-2-
WP No. 4364 of 2022
DIRECTING THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 16.06.2021 AND 09.08.2021,AS PER ANNEXURE-K AND
L AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER ALLOTTING ALTERNATIVE
COMMERCIAL SITE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER IN LIEU OF
THE ENCROACHED PORTION AS ADMITTED IN THE LETTER
DATED 03.06.13 ISSUED BY THE R2 AS PER ANNEXURE-J.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The essential grievance of the petitioner is as to the respondent-MUDA appropriating his private property not only without due process of acquisition but also without payment of any recompense for the said land, either in the form of money or in the form of compensatory site, as the case may be.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that right to property although is no longer a fundamental right after the 44th Amendment of 1978, the same continues as the constitutional guarantee whereby -3- WP No. 4364 of 2022 right to compensation though not in so many words mentioned is in-built within the contours of Article 300A vide K.T.PLANATATION PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA (2011) 9 SCC 1. This having been said, no property can be taken away without paying compensation to its owner. He draws attention of the court to several representations in which he has sought for payment of compensation for the property.
3. The State has entered appearance through the learned AGA and respondent-MUDA has entered appearance through its Sr. Panel Counsel who has this day filed Statement of Objections in the open Court wherein paragraphs 10 & 11 read as under:
"10. It is submitted that the Petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court seeking a writ of mandamus seeking a direction to consider the representation dated 16.06.2021 and 09.08.2021 and also further to allot alternative commercial site in favor of the petitioner in lieu of the encroached portions as admitted in the letter dated 03.06.2013 issued by the Respondent no.2. It is submitted that Representation of the petitioner will be considered and necessary action will be taken in accordance with law to allot an equal extent -4- WP No. 4364 of 2022 of land having equal potentiality to the petitioner.
11. Pursuant to the survey the Authority could not proceed further in the matter for various administrative difficulties and as such there has been inordinate delay in considering the petitioners representations for allotment of the similar site in favour of the petitioner or compensate for the same. It is submitted that the Authority will require atleast 8 weeks to consider the application of the petitioner to allot the same measurement/valued site (either commercial or residential site) as mentioned in the survey sketch in favour of the petitioner."
4. In view of the assurance given by respondent- MUDA in terms of its Statement of Objections, the paragraphs whereof are reproduced above, this writ petition need not be kept pending. Suffice to say that the contents of paragraphs 10 & 11 would be added and be treated as an undertaking given to the Court in addition to the petition, breach of which would amount to contempt of court which may attract penal action and exemplary costs as well.
-5-WP No. 4364 of 2022
In the above circumstances and with the above observations, writ petition is disposed off. Time for compliance is three months reckoned from this day.
Now, no costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Snb/