Abdul Quduse vs State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Abdul Quduse vs State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2021

Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar

                              1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                       BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

       WRIT PETITION No. 18118 OF 2014 (LA-BDA)
BETWEEN:

ABDUL QUDUSE
S/O LATE SHEIK MOHAMED
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO. 28
1ST BLOCK, SOMESHWAR NAGAR
JAYANAGAR,BENGALURU-11
                                          ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHANKARAPPA, ADV.)

AND:

1.      STATE OF KARNATAKA
        REPT BY THE SECRETARY
        HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
        M S BUIDLING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
        BANGALORE-01.

2.      THE COMMISSIONER
        BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
        BENGALURU-20

3.      THE COMMISSIONER
        BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
        N R SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002.

4.    SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
      BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
      BENGALURU - 560 020.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T.P. SRINIVASA, AGA FOR R-1
    SRI.M. UNNIKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2
    SRI. N.R. JAGADEESHWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 )

     THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANN-A
                                       2




THE SKETCH PREPARED BY THE OFFICIALS OF THE R-2 & R-3
I.E., OFFICIALS NAMELY ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
NO.2 SUB DIVISION EAST, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, BENGALURU AND THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER, KORAMANGALA SUB DIVISION BBMP BENGALURU
AND ETC.

      THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                                ORDER

In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

" a) Issue a writ , order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash the Annexure 'A', the sketch prepared by the officials of the respondents 2 & 3 i.e., officials namely Assistant Executive Engineer, No.2 Sub-Division East Bengaluru Development Authority, Bengaluru and the Assistant Executive Engineer, Koramangala, Sub- Division BBMP, Bengaluru;

b) And Issue any other writ order or direction to the respondents under the facts and circumstances of the case and allow this writ petition with costs, in the interest of justice and equity"

2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned counsel for the BBMP, learned counsel for the BDA and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the documents produced, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to Annexure- S 'Sketch' dated 13.06.1996 in order to contend that the petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of the property to the East of the property shown as 'Beauty Spot' in the sketch. It is therefore contended that prior to issuing the impugned sketch at Annexure-A, whereby the extent of land shown as 'Beauty Spot' has been increased in the direction East to West, no notice was issued to the petitioner before either conducting survey or issuing the impugned sketch. Consequently, the impugned sketch affects the proprietary and possessary rights of the petitioner over the property situated to the East of the 'Beauty spot' and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the BBMP and learned counsel for the BDA, in addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the statement of objections in unison submits that the petitioner does not have any 4 manner of right, title, interest or possession over any portion of the land to the East of the property shown as 'Beauty spot' and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as sought for by him in the present petition.

5. After having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the material on record, I am of the considered opinion that in the light of the undisputed fact that the sketch at Annexure-S showed the property described as 'Beauty spot' in a lesser extent as against larger extent shown in the Sketch Annexure-A which was issued without granting any opportunity to the petitioner or hearing him either before preparing the sketch or before the joint inspection that is said to have been conducted as per the letter dated 06.12.2013 written by the BDA to the BBMP, I deem it fit and proper to dispose of the petition by setting aside the impugned sketch at Annexure-A and issue necessary directions in this regard.

6. In the result, I pass the following:-

(i) Petition is disposed of.

(ii) The impugned sketch at Annexure-A dated 06.12.2013 is hereby set aside.

(iii) Matter is remitted back to the BDA, East Sub- Division, HSR Layout, Bangalore, as well as jurisdictional BBMP to conduct joint inspection / survey of the property in question and prepare a fresh sketch in accordance with law after issuing necessary notice to all necessary parties including the petitioner and granting them sufficient opportunity in this regard.

Sd/-

JUDGE Srl.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court