Sri B S Shankar Singh vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 June, 2011

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri B S Shankar Singh vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 June, 2011

Bench: B.V.Nagarathna

-[-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAN GALORE
DATED THIS THE 167! DAY OF JUNE, 201 1 - 7
> BEFORE : 7
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V NAGAR THNA,

W.P.NO.34417/2010 (L A-BDA).

BETWEEN

L. SRI BS SHANKAR SINGH -.
S/O LATE R SHIVAM SINGH.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEA LRS, mS
R/A RAGHUNATHA NILAYA, a
R/A NO.4/12, PIPELINE, ~
KALAPPA BLOCK, SRINAGAR, sy
BANGALORE 960050 m

ia

SMT B DEVIKA W/OBS* SHA ANKAR SINGH
AGED ABOUT.48 YEARS,

R/A RAGHUNATHA NILAYA,

R/A NO.4/12, PIPE LINE, |.

KALAPPA BLOCK |

SRINAGAR, BANGALGRE-560050

.. PETITIONERS

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- BY TH SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
_ URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
~. VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-56000 1

» THE COMMISSIONER

: no :

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SANKEY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560020

3. THE DEPU TY COMMISSIONER (L A)

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT PAUTHORE ry

--
%
Oe


SANKEY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560020

4. THE COMMISSIONER 7
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA P ALIKE .
CORPORATION OFFICES, N.R.SQUARE, .
BANGALORE-560002 ae

5. H KRISHNA REDDY S/O HANLU MAPPA
AGED ABOUT MAJOR,
R/A ARAKERE, B.G. ROAD,.
BANGALORE-76

... RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.K.S. MALLIKARJUNAIAH. HECP FOR RI
SRI. RAVI G.SABHAHIT, ADV. FOR R2.& R38
SRI. K.V.NARASIMHAN, ADV..FOR'R4 | |
SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR, FOR RAVI B.NAIK ASSTS. FOR RS

THIS W: P. 1S 5 FILED: UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTI TUt ION: OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
ENTIRE 'REC ORDS "FROM. THE FIRST RESPONDENT WITH
REFERENCE. TO ANNEXUR EA IS CONCERNED AND
QUASH THE. IMPUGNED- NOTIF ICATION ISSUED BY THE
FIRST. RESPOND ENT © VIDE ANNEXURE A DATED

22.09. 20106,

o "This netition coming on for further orders this day, the
court made, the followi ing:

ORDER

Though this writ petition is posted for further orders, with the consent of counsel on both Sides, it is heard finally.

72, In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notification bearing No.UDD/ 776/MNX/2002 issued on 22.9.2010 under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, if we .

1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act) by the first respondent (Annexure-A) and the petitioner has also sought a declaration that the respondent-authorities have he power . to withdraw the acquisition proceedings invoking Section A8(1) of the Act (hereinafter referred to as, the Act}. . .

3. Learned Government Pleaider today. filed "a -mémo enclosing a copy of the notification' dated 13.6:200 L bearing No.Wee 776 roesexea 2002@a71-1)' stating that in view of the denotification dated 22.9.2010 Being withdrawn by the notification dated 1.6.20 11S the writ petition would not survive for-.coinsidétation of ihe validity of the impugned notification dated 22,9.20 10: "therefore, this writ petition could be disposed of in view of notification dated 13.6.2011.

_ . 7 Learned, counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel 'fo "the Bangalore Development Authority do not dispute this position, Counsel for the 5% respondent also submits that "today he 'has received a copy of the notification dated "13,6.201 1. In view of the withdrawal of the impugned

- notification dated 22.9.2010, all learned counsel submit that

- the consideration of the validity of the said notification dated 22.9.2010 is not necessiated in this writ petition.

f fu

5. Submission of the counsel is placed on record.

6. By notification dated 22.9.2010 which is produced at, Annexure-A to the writ petition, the State in "exercise" at power under Section 48(1) of the Act- had withdrawn from ; acquisition made for the purpose of Byrasandva 'Tavarekere . Madivala VI Stage Layout ith., respect of Sy.No.80/1 measuring 3 acres 26 guntas situated at Arekere Vv illage. The said notification is withidrawa by the "Rotification dated 13.6.2011. The same reads-as follows: -

:

ee eee ee ee ee "3 L\--2 a pi Py oS magus, Teebe Asie. 8080/1 CON 03 asd waneday eLoaaHen sod, / £ 7/097 On esSme2s Roadsmesca 202A 05 22/09/20100.. sHxaevs Aossdesca 776 woes t ery. aa(DRE& "925 RAR P91, =PoARrAy 20 BOO. 4ADO. "LAA HAeBHO B22Y BOOCBAGWAT OHwTo0ss ~ 9 Bleteee ee A Boga : aaa ant avant REFS sees a sesao QIoT ROdeOA Ss Ssgg--H}OT wad woos wg pad Oye 2o0WCOMCIOAT.

STAChIE reese men og RWaAMveps BOF baa Oe WdOO PATIO BIRDYAIO SEN C rr 9.0058 ABO OC BSC Ory?

QAO ~ ~ fod ee pel ar. = AOBONFIOO, BOE 3S da WS, 2ONGDS, Ae) wr oa) wAARSodA ABA COMASHO, HSA, BSS 100° 3APAY a ee 100 BInSN wWorieeco YANO: PeHRMoro-

(4) egodnosoo, Uoneveth SHAH ReHweo Bm wpe gyek oe OLDBOO, (UAB), WONG

630. (3) tLexeemeAsd, woreda: VeIaI.O e

7. Hence, in view of 'the: withdrawal of the impugned notification dated 22.9 2010, the vie . sought by the petitioner bei ing ianted: nothing: survives for consideration in this" anit, petition: the writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of, with the observation that the acquisition of land in respect of the 'aforesaid survey number has attained finahty: .

"8... Learned Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and the counsel for respondent No.5 are permitted to file power within a period of three weeks from today.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court