Smt. V G Radha vs Mysore Urban Development Authority on 24 October, 2016

[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. V G Radha vs Mysore Urban Development Authority on 24 October, 2016

Bench: S.Abdul Nazeer

                              1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016

                         BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER

        WRIT PETITION No.8680 OF 2016 (LA-UDA)

BETWEEN:

1.     SMT. V. G. RADHA
       W/O LATE B. BASAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

2.     ABISHEK BASAPPA,
       S/O LATE B.BASAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

3.     ASWAIN BASAPPA,
       S/O LATE B. BASAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

       ALL ARE RESIDING AT
       NO 379/D, NEAR LALITH MAHAL GATE,
       T. N. PURA ROAD, SIDDARTHA NAGAR,
       MYSORE - 570 011.                 ... PETITIONERS

       (BY SRI JWALA KUMAR, ADV.)

AND:

1.     MYSORE URBAN
       DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
       (IN SHORT MUDA), J. L .B. ROAD,
       MYSORE - 570024, REPRESENTED BY
       ITS COMMISSIONER

2.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       HOUSING & URBAN DEPARTMENT,
       M .S. BUILDING,
       BENGALURU - 560 001
                               2



      REPRESENTED BY
      ITS SECRETARY.                       ... RESPONDENTS

      (BY SRI T. P VIVEKANANDA, ADV. FOR R1
          SRI T.S.MAHANTESH, AGA FOR R2)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DATED 12.12.2006 VIDE ANNEX-A
ISSUED BY THE R-1.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

In this case, the petitioners have called in question the legality and correctness of the preliminary notification No.LAQ(6).CR.434/2005-06 dated 12.12.2006, whereby the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (for short 'the MUDA') has proposed to acquire the lands of the petitioners for the formation of a layout.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Admittedly, the final notification has not been issued for acquisition of the lands in question in furtherance of the preliminary notification. In an 3 identical case, this Court in C.G Gangadhar /vs./ Mysore Urban Development Authority, Mysore and another - 2013(4) Kar.L.J. 559, has quashed the impugned preliminary notification therein. Following the said decision, this Court in W.P.Nos.10917- 10923/2014 and connected matters (between Sri C.M.Swamy /vs./ Mysore Urban Development Authority, Mysore and another) has quashed the impugned preliminary notification therein.

4. For the reasons set out in the aforesaid orders, the preliminary notification impugned herein in so far as the petitioners lands are concerned is also quashed. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE KLY/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court