G AILDAS Vs. CHAIRMAN CITB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners allege that they are the owners of about 3 acres in land Survey Nos.441 and 442 of Kempapura Agrahara, near Magadi Road Bangalore. It is their case that permission has been taken to convert the said land for non-agricultural purposes. It is their further case that they applied to the first respondent - The Bangalore City Improvement Trust Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) for sanction of private layout on the aforesaid land. It is their further case that the prayer for sanction of the layout was granted by the Board by its resolution d/.11th of Nov, 1970 under subject No.297 subject to usual conditions, and that when certain modifications in the layout were proposed, the modified layout was sanctioned by the Board on the 8th of Dec, 1971, under Subject No.557, copy of which is produced in the case as Ext 'A'. In pursuance of the said resolution the petitioners were informed by the Board by their letter dated the 20th of August, 1973 that the layout proposed by the petitioners has been sanctioned as modified by the Board subject to the petitioners satifyjng certain conditions imposed by them. One of the conditions imposed was that the petitioners should pay certain amount towards layout charges. It is the case of the petitioner that he tendered a cheque for Rs.70,600 dated the 2nd of Oct, 1973. It is the further case of the petitioners that they had taken all necessary steps to comply with the conditions prescribed by the Board, and they are ready and willing to comply with the conditions subject to which the layout has been sanctioned. But on the 28th of March, 1974, the petitoners were informed by the Board that the Govt by their letter dated the 19th of Jan, 1974 has rejected the request of the petitioners for sanction of the private layout, and that therefore the layout charges is returned. The communication of the Board dated the 28th of March, 1974 has been produced in the case as Ext 'D'.

(2.) The petitioners have challenged in this writ petition the communication of the Board dated 28th of March, 1974, which stated that the petitioners' prayer for sanction of private layout has been rejected. They have further prayed for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Board to give effect to its resolution sanctioning the layout and further for a direction to the Board to forbear from revoking the sanctioned layout plan.

(3.) The Board has been constituted under the provisions of the City of Bangalore Improvement Act 1945 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). S.25 is the relevant section pertaining to forming of new extension or layouts and for making new private streets. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the Corporation of the City of Bangalore having concurred with the Board in the matter of sanctioning the layout in favour of the petitioner, the State Govt has no powers to interfere with the statutory powers of the Board in the matter of sanctioning the private layout. It was urged that the Board having passed final resolutions in favour of the petitioners sanctioning the layout subject to the petitioners satisfying certain conditions, the Corporotion of the City of Bangalore having agreed with the proposal of the Board, the Board was not at all justified in seeking the approval of the State Govt for its resolutions sanctioning the layout in favour of the petitioners. In support of these contentions, the learned Counsel for the petitioners placed relience on Section 25 of the Act.