RAMACHANDRA Vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the records.

(2.) This petition presents a sordid state of affairs in the functioning of the respondent / Bangalore Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "BDA"). Petitioner is a freedom fighter. On an application filed by him for allotment of a plot from the respondent, a plot bearing No.202 at BTM Layout, 6th Stage, 1st Phase, measuring 30' x 40' under 'G' category was allotted to him and a lease-cum-sale agreement was executed on 25.02.2008 (Annexure-'A'). According to the petitioner, on 16.09.2011, the respondent on its own accord allotted an alternative site bearing No.696, 3rd Block, 2nd Phase, BTM 6th Stage, Bangalore vide Annexure-'B' and the sale deed Annexure-'A' was taken back, but this plot could not be located, hence he gave a representation to allot him a proper plot. Accordingly, the BDA issued a letter vide Annexure-'E' dated 11.04.2012 informing the petitioner that site No.39 in BTM IV Stage, II Block, Bengaluru, measuring 30' x 40' was allotted to him and payment made earlier would be adjusted towards the said plot. That being the case, by a subsequent communication dated 30.12.2014 vide Annexure-'G', allotment made in favour of the petitioner in respect of site No.39 was cancelled.

(3.) The reason assigned for cancellation of the allotment as reflected in Annexure-'G' is that, petitioner allowed a neighbouring occupant to trespass into plot No.202 allotted to the petitioner on 25.02.2008 and contrary to the terms of the allotment, he entered into an agreement to sell the said plot to one G.V.Ramesh and handed over the original allotment letter to him.