Karnataka High Court
Smt Mubeentaj vs The Karnataka Public Land Corporation on 7 July, 2010
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THES mg 07"" my OF JULY 201!)
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND '_B'YR§:\.RVEf)i)'Y'.~ A
WRIT PETITION No. 20241 op2o;o (KLR}REs) " *
BETWEEN:
Sm_t.Mubeentaj, «. .
W/0 Zafrulia Mohammad Khan, O'
Aged about 57 years, House. Nho'.-.144,
Tejashwininagalfm*Bam1er;gatta V ' "
Kam1nanaha1ii_vG,rar§§éi,__.Begur:H_ob1i., V
Bangalore O
Bangaiope ~ ...PETm0NER
(By Shriyuths'. and' J N. Naveen, Advocates)
AND:
v . '3?§heLOV'K?;1'natzik'2i ZP11.biic Land
« O Cdrporaii.Qr1 Limited,
T' " O,f'fi¢e"--C0m.p<)L1nd,
._ I(.'G{R0_ad.,'B'énga]01'e,
' VRep.1.'eSe:--;1téd by its
}n/I2i"I3i:1g'ihg Di1'ect0.r.
Bangaiore Metropolitan
' --. Task Force, Office of the
Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara
Palike, Bzlngalme,
Ix)
Represented By its Commissioner.
3. The Lake Development Authority,
No.49, Church Street,
Bangalore -- 560 001.
Rep.By its Commissioner.
4. The Tahsildar,
Bangalo1'e South Taluk,
Bangalore.
(By Shri. G. Krishna Murthy, Special RG.o:ve_rnment";A
Respondent No.1 and 2 and
Shri. R. Omkumzu', Additi<)nal'»..V:Gove1'nih;e_nt'R-Psditocttte for
Respondent No.3 & 4)
Th1sowi~ti:,VpPeuuon is"fiIe~d'1inderArticles 226 and 227 of the
Constiwtion ciifswlrvndial3pi*ayi'rig't() direct the Respondents No..l & 4
not to take coe1'ciVve':'s.t_e.psb tuider the premises of Section l92--A of
the Karnataka Lancl'i1eve'r1~ne:A;ct, 1964 without issuing a notice
calling for (5i;'-jec:.iL>ns_ arid "ne_é:ring of the petitioner by due process
knownto law einalietcf, R' R
_ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing this
day,j't'he Céotujtgrriade the following: -
ORDER
Thyei present petition coming on for p1"e1imi_nary hearing, the for the petitioner. Sri..G. Krishnamurthy, learned Special Z Government Advocate for respondents E and 2 and the Government Advocate are heard.
2. The brief facts are as follows» The petitioner claims as the ow.n.e.r_of_'a siitei.ijfori1";.ec1 in ii Survey No.l20 of Kammanahalli, Begiir Taluk. The petitioner claims to hzi.ye'~~purch.ased t.hev:san:ie"tInder a sale deed dated 30.7.2001. and;"obta:ineci~__sanctio'ned"V plan for construction of residential pre-intisevs'lfs'om._tl1e;Basavapura Grama Panchayath and _has"«p:co'nst1;ucted~"la ho{is'e'th_e_rfein and the same is assessed pi9o'pe.rty Thelpetitioner subsequently paid taxes to the Bruhath " Barigalojrc iV"l\/llahainagara Palike within whose jurisdiction theisiteiisl presently covered. It is claimed that the for the Legal Enforcement Cell of the fiiitst "i'esp(>'ndesnt threatened to demolish the construction in .questi_o'n onithefground that the property is an encroachment on the lite-..n.k area and it is in this background that the petitioner is this Court. %
3. It is stated that there are several houses in thegarepa all of whom have been similarly threatened and the said l§E'l,_'~u1€' filed objections. which are yet to be Conzsitleife-d"--.::by respondents. However, insofar as the 'petit'ioner is icon-cie'rn'ed, petitioner apprehends that his°ipr'opertyi'v~Wot1ld'iVbe:{.de.tno_lisheddi* without following due procedurep.o.f:'i'aw"--and hence, is before this Court.
4. Tphev1e.gtrned.te'ouiise1forikeslpondents r and 4 would submit that adr_nitte_d' that there are several encroach»merits,.ixiltichi'a1fe"ireqti:ired to be removed from the tank bed and theliallegedlo_i$}iiers.i:_ir1 the said property have been placed .4.4_vunde:r5¥11otiiCe,p 'fhe'«p.e.t.itioner has also been similarly placed on _ 'lf:_ti1e"itpe'ti.ti()ner were to make. a representation defending his ,position;s~ilthe said respondent would consider his case and "~.thereaft"er_t~al<e steps in accordance wfbbiaw.
5. Recording his submission. the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the respondents I and 4, who shaii deal with the Same in a<_i&;'o_if"d2V1.ie:s;e with law. In the meanwhile, the respondents shall hovtiteitit-ei'.fe.f¢ with the petitioner's property withotttliiie"prottpess i_aw."--:i«T petitioner is granted liberty to filehis obijectiiéms witriih seiven, from today.
6. The G-ove1'nmerit_e_'ad'vo3§:2t'te permitted to file his me mo ot'appea1'2_1.I1«$e_ for respoI1dentsVi3~van_(ui V Sd/-3 JUDGE iaiw, A. 'A