1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013

B E F O R E

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA

WRIT PETITION NO.40816/2013 (BDA)

BETWEEN:

Anantharaman G.V., S/o. G.S. Venkatesh Iyear, Aged about 65 years, No.1551, Prakruthi, 13 th Main, 1 st Stage, Bangalore – 560 078. …PETITIONER

(By Sri H.T. Vasanth Kumar, Adv.)

AND:

Bangalore Development Authority, T. Chowdaiah Road, Bangalore – 560 020, Rept. by its Commissioner. …RESPONDENT

(By Sri Ashwin S. Halady, Adv.)

This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of , praying to direct the respondent authority to consider the representations dated 12.9.2008 vide Annexure-H and requests of the petitioner to ratify the allotment of site No.24 measuring 9x12 mtrs., vide allotment letter at Annexure-B accepting the registration fees and set aside the impugned order vide Annexure-G dated 20.7.2005 issued by the respondent authority for 2

terminating the allotted site No.24 measuring 9x12 meters at Anjanapura Layout, Bangalore.

This petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:

ORDER

Revenue sites bearing Nos.235 & 236, each measuring 30’ x 40’ and situated at Maruthi Layout, formed in Sy. Nos.23, 25 & 26 of Anjanapura Village were acquired for formation of Anjanapura Layout, pursuant to the issue of a preliminary Notification dated 20.03.1999, gazetted on 26.03.1999 and final declaration dated

28.08.2000, gazetted on 11.09.2000 i.e., issued under

Ss.17(1) & 19(1) of BDA Act, 1976. Batch of cases challenging the said acquisition Notifications were disposed of on 20.07.2001 vide Annexure-A. The petitioner and his wife were allotted separate sites by the respondent on incentive basis. Petitioner deposited the site cost and sought execution of the sale deed of site No.24 of

Anjanapura II A Block. A show cause notice vide

Annexure-E was issued on 13.05.2005. Petitioner submitted reply vide Annexure-F. Finding that the claim of 3

the petitioner for allotment of incentive site is unjustified in view of his wife Smt. N. Manjula having been allotted site

No.52 in II A Block of Anjanapura Layout, a site cancellation order dated 20.07.2005 vide Annexure-G was sent. Petitioner having kept quiet, submitted a representation dated 12.09.08 vide Annexure-H. The Law

Officer of BDA having furnished his opinion vide

Annexure-J, this writ petition was filed to quash

Annexure-G and for directing the respondents to execute the sale deed of the allotted site No.24 situated at

Anjanapura II A Block.

2. Heard the learned advocates and perused the writ petition record.

3. In identical circumstances, a site cancellation order of the respondent, questioned in W.P.No.7094/2007 was not interfered with, in view of the prohibition in sub-

Rule(3) of Rule 10 of BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984.

4. The petitioner’s wife having been allotted a site on incentive basis, the allotment made vide Annexure-B in 4

favour of the petitioner being in violation of Rule 10(3), after issuing show cause notice vide Annexure-E and considering the reply vide Annexure-F, there being no factual dispute, the site cancellation order as at Annexure-

G has been passed. The said order being in conformity with the order dated 14.11.2007 passed in

W.P.No.7094/2007, does not warrant interference.

In the result, writ petition is dismissed. However, the BDA is directed to refund the sale consideration amount deposited by the petitioner, if not already refunded, within a period of four weeks from the date the petitioner surrenders the original allotment intimation as at

Annexure-B and all related documents along with the refund voucher in duplicate.

No costs.

Sri Ashwin S. Halady, learned advocate is permitted to file vakalath within two weeks.

Sd/- JUDGE sac*