Site news

Let BDA stop construction & wait final outcome in OS NO 26334/2014 as status quo order was for both and vacated for both and is not clear.

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
Let BDA stop construction & wait final outcome in OS NO 26334/2014 as status quo order was for both and vacated for both and is not clear.
by System Administrator - Saturday, 3 January 2015, 1:33 AM
 

By: M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bangaluru: Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project is facing Lokayukta case in 3026/2014. Let BDA stop construction in S.No 101/2BValgerahalli Kengeri Hobli Bangalore South Taluka & wait final outcome in OS NO 26334/2014 as status quo order was issued for both and vacated for both and it is not clear Means both were asked to maintain status quo and now both are free not to maintain status quo which is technically impossible to implement and case is admitted in OS NO 26334/2014 and Lis is pending . Kengeri police should restrict Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project and stop construction if any carried out by Gowri construction. Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project is in hurry and repeating same blunder what housing division has committed in other similar cases and Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project cares too hoots to the order of honourable MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY in WRIT PETITION NOS. 12962-12970 of 2012 (LA-BDA). Somehow he want to finish off the 200 core project and vanish from the place without caring rule of law and go back to his parent PWD department leaving BDA in deep financial mess . Land acquisition officer has to defend in the court but here he himself has taken the responsibility of land acquisition officer and defending the case illegally. The land owner has filed WP in high court of Karnataka. Let BDA wait for final outcome of the case and if BDA wins the case then finally it can do it its project any time. In a similar case by BDA housing department and same Gowri construction contractor continued the work and completed the work during the pendency of the case but the case went against the BDA. BDA is not learning any lessen even though in similar case in the high court of Karnataka at Bangalore in its order dated 14 th day of February 2014 bythe honourable MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDYin WRIT PETITION NOS. 12962-12970 of 2012 (LA-BDA) had allowed WP. It is also to be seen that the BDA has plunged ahead with the project and erected building even during the pendency of this petition - unconscious of its folly or may be even brash indifference as to the consequences if any. It is not in doubt that the petitions, however, would succeed in the light of the above infirmity and are accordingly allowed. The BDA was directed to put the petitioners in possession of lands of similar nature and extent as were the subject matter of acquisition. This case should open the eyes of BDA.

Kengeri Police Inspector need to book FIR on Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project based on the complaint ofM.Mahesh s/o Late Mahadevaiahas he has violated latest final notification issued by Government under section 19 of BDA Act . Final notifications are final are not limited to anybody or any petitioners they are only limited to preliminary notifications and schedule of final notification .What is not featured in final notification gets de-notified. At a time two final notifictions cannot be in vogue .Earlier one gets superseded with new final notification. .."Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project in has no business in land acquisition matters and he defending IN THE COURT OF THE XVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, BANGALORE O. S. No. 26334/2014 in respect of Survey Number 101/2B ValagerahalliKengeri Hobli Bangalore South Taluka is illegal when he is not land acquisition officer .Reportedly commissioner has not issued any orderauthorizinghim to defend the case and Additional Land Acquisition Officer was not allowed to file objections with the connivance of the contractor and there was no legal opinion obtained to re-start the work as case is pending in court and honorable court had given status quo order for both the parties by an order dated09-10-2014and vocated the status quo order for the both parties as vacating the status quo order give equal opportunity to both parties to re-start the work as status quo order given was to restrain both parties to maintain the status quo . Sri Kishna Murthy AEE Housing project did got the judicial blunder by getting the status quo order vacated for both the parties vacating the earlier status quo order given to both the parties which given was given to restrain both parties to maintain the status quo and now both are free to work on the land And it creates law and order problem for police and this order in any case is challenged in high court by plaintiff against BDA. It is better BDA wait final order in the case before tress passing the land. It is also to be seen that the BDA has plunged ahead with the project and erected started erecting building even during the pendency of this petition started the work - unconscious of its folly or may be even brash indifference as to the consequences if any to be borne by BDA. Reportedly it is expected that and It is not in doubt that the petitions, however, would succeed in the light of the several cases and infirmity committed. The acquisition proceedings in so far as the petitioners' lands in terms of the impugned gazette Final notifications are concerned; BDA earlier notifications stand quashed or superseded. Hope fully The BDA will be directed to put the petitioners in possession of lands which were never be the subject matter of acquisition”.

Non-compliance of Karnataka Government Gazette attracts criminal provisions under section 188 & 166 and 166A of IPC. BDA Officers need to give legitimate respect to second final notification whether it is Arkavathi Layout Gazetted on June 18, 2014 or Ganana Bharathi Layout Gazetted on October 06 1997 ”.Kengeri Police Inspector need to book FIR on complaint ofM.Mahesh s/o Late Mahadevaiahagainst sri Krishana Murthy AEE BDA Housing Sub-Division Mr Sham Bhat Commissioner BDA and Sri PN Naik EM and BDA Contractor and BDA Security Guards & Task Force officials for Non-compliance of Karnataka Government Gazette attracts criminal provisions as they are tress passing private property disrespecting Karnataka government Gazette UDD -629-MNX-97 DATED 06-10-1997 which prominently did not include the land in S.No 101/2BValgerahalli Kengeri Hobli Bangalore South Taluka Hence it is not a BDA Property and provide security to legitimate owner of the property. As Bangalore police are filing casesunder IPC Section 188, which empowers the police commissioner or a public servant to enforce a government order on a person, institution or management .Non-compliance attracts up to one-month jail term or a fine which may extend to Rs 200 or both. The Karnataka government had issued the guidelines to schools following a spurt in assaults on children in the past couple of months. The Karnataka high court recently directed the government, city police and schools to strictly implement the safety measures.BDA and Government issues two notifications for land acquisition under BDA Act and land acquisition Act. Under Section 17 of BDA Act BDA issues preliminary Notification and under section 19 Government issues final notification in respect of notified land finally.. And Government has statutory power of re-issuing final notification any number of times under section 19 of BDA Act. The old final notification is superseded by new final notification as old order get replaced by new order of Government .The court orders or proceeding's in respect of old final notification are not applicable to new final notification as new final notification is not subject matter of court proceedings. Wherefore all court orders applicable in respect of old final notification of Ganana Bharathi Layout and Arkavathi Layoutare not applicableto new final notifications ofGanana Bharathi Layout and Arkavathi Layout"Old schedule of old final notification get replaced with new schedule of new final notification as preliminary notification remains same. BDA Officers need to give legitimate respect to second final notification whether it is Arkavathi Layoutgazetted on June 18, 2014 or Ganana Bharathi Layoutgazetted on October 06 1997 as both notifications wereissued under 19 (1) of the BDA Act. Several NOC have been issued by BDA Land acquisition officers in respect of the lands which do not feature in above two final notifications to several land owners. The land acquisition officers areduty bound to issue NOC for all survey numbers which do not appear in Final notification of BDA issued by Government under section 19 (1) of the BDA Act. Final notifications are final are not limited to anybody or any petitioners they are only limited to preliminary notifications and schedule of final notification .What is not featured in final notification gets de-notified. At a time two final notifictions cannot be in vogue .Earlier one gets superseded with new final notification. .."In the similar manner Non-compliance of Karnataka Government Gazette attracts criminal provisions. Request is made to Kengeri Police to book criminal cases under IPC Section 188, 168 A (Public servant disobeying directions under law) which empowers the police and public servant to enforce a government order on a person, institution or management against Sri Krishana Murthy AEE BDA Housing Sub-Division Sri Sham Bhat Sri P.N.Naik EM BDA , Commissioner BDA for willfully disrespectingfinal gazette notification UDD -629-MNX-97 DATED 06-10-1997 which prominently did not include the land in S.No 101/2BValgerahalli Kengeri Hobli Bangalore South Taluka . Hence it is not a BDA Property. BDA is giving respect to second final notification of Arkavathi Layoutgazetted on June 18, 2014 and where as Sri Krishana Murthy AEE BDA is fighting case illegally in OS 26334/2014 dated 09-10-2014 to maintain status quo and disrespecting the second final Ganana Bharathi Layoutgazetted on October 06 1997 and bypassing BDA Additional Land acquisition officer . Sri Krishana Murthy AEE BDA is not appointed as BDA Additional Land acquisition officer. His personnel interest in the case is itself is proof of corruption. Non-compliance of Karnataka Government Gazette attracts up to one-month jail term or a fine which may extend to Rs 200 or both under 166 and 166Aand Non-compliance of Karnataka Government Gazette attracts up to 6month to 2 yearjail term or a fineboth under 166 Afor Public servant disobeying directions under law .