M. JAIRAJ Vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of writ court with the following prayer:

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that his client belongs to Schedule Caste and that he was offered a site vide Allotment Letter dtd. 21/2/2003; however he had great financial difficulty and therefore, he could not make payment in terms of the condition incorporated in the Allotment Letter; in view of that, his client has withdrawn the amount deposited by way of initial payment. That being the position, the Court should ask the BDA to show the mercy, regard being had to multiple attempts he has made for securing a one single site. Learned counsel heavily banks upon the proviso to Rule 13 of the BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984.

(3.) Learned Panel counsel appearing for the BDA opposes the petition contending that since on his own the Petitioner has withdrawn the initial deposit specifically pleading financial requirement for the payment of college fees of this daughter, now he cannot turn around and claim that the allotment should be restored or that some other site should be allotted. He loudly reads BDA's Endorsement dtd. 6/10/2009 (Annexure-H) which the petitioner himself has produced. He also repels the invokation of proviso to the subject Rule in the fact matrix of the case. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.