K S PRABHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these cases, the petitioners have common pleadings. The Bangalore Development Authority allotted sites in favour of the petitioners in Rajamahal Vilas, I Stage, Bangalore. Thereafter, lease-cum-sale agreements were executed by the petitioners and the petitioners were put in possession by issue of possession certificates. The full amount of allotment price of the sites was paid by each of the petitioners to Bangalore Development Authority and there is no dispute about it.

(2.) When the petitioners were making preparations to put up constructions on the sites allotted to them, the State of Karnataka issued notices to the petitioners purporting to exercise its power under Section 63 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 and calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why the allotment of sites made in their favour should not be cancelled for two reasons; (1) that the allottees have not registered their names duly in accordance with Rule 8 of the Bangalore Development Authority Allotment of Sites Rules, 1982, and (2) that the sites allotted do not belong to the category of stray sites.

(3.) On receipt of the notices, the petitioners submitted replies. Subsequently there was no personal hearing and orders came to be passed by the State Government cancelling the allotments. Hence the petitioners became aggrieved and approached this Court invoking the Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.