Site news

“NO FAMILY” CAN SURVIVE ON 11K A YEAR: AS PER KARNATAKA HC REALLOT BDA SITE TO VIMALA SC/ST APPLICANT

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
“NO FAMILY” CAN SURVIVE ON 11K A YEAR: AS PER KARNATAKA HC REALLOT BDA SITE TO VIMALA SC/ST APPLICANT
by System Administrator - Saturday, 27 August 2016, 9:14 AM
 

By : M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bangalore : BDA should to stop exhibiting the style of functioning in a dictatorial manner either without understanding the statutory provisions, law laid down in a catena of decisions, violating rule of law or in utter ignorance of law. Request is made to Revoke the cancellation order made in respect Smt Vimala SC/ST applicant of site allotment letter No BDA/DS-IV/667/ark-BLK-III/2005-06 DATED 30-12-205 as BDA need to consider only the income applicant woman and not of her husband as Quoting BDA Rules, the judge in a recent order had said what is required to be considered is the income of the applicant and not that of her husband.

The Karnataka high court has wondered whether any family can survive on an annual income of less than Rs 11,800 -- the ceiling to apply for Bangalore Development Authority sites under the economically weaker sections (EWS) category. Observing that the government must revise the ceiling for all categories every year, the high court has said a beneficiary must not pay for government's failure. "The Rs 11,800 ceiling was fixed long ago. The same is required to be enhanced from time to time. There is a failure on the part of the government in not enhancing the income to determine (if) a person is eligible for EWS (sites) or not,” a division bench observed, dismissing a writ appeal filed by the BDA"On account of the lapse committed by the government, a person cannot be penalized. Every year, the government is bound to fix the ceiling for all the categories. When there is a failure on the part of the government to do so, the authorities cannot set aside the order of allotment three years after the same was made” the bench has observed, upholding the order of a single-judge bench. Shakeerabi, from Ilyasnagar, had applied for an EWS site with a claim that her annual income is Rs 10,000. She was allotted a 20x30ft site, and paid Rs 56,000 for it. Three years later, the BDA issued a show-cause notice, saying she had concealed the family's income. Her family's annual earnings stood at Rs 21,000, factoring her husband's income, it said. On June 8, 2007, the BDA revoked the site allotment. A single-judge bench had quashed the cancellation of the site. Quoting BDA Rules, the judge had said what is required to be considered is the income of the applicant and not that of her husband.

BDA should to stop exhibiting the style of functioning in a dictatorial manner either without understanding the statutory provisions, law laid down in a catena of decisions, violating rule of law or in utter ignorance of law. BDA cannot exercised powers illegally, arbitrarily and discriminately giving a go-bye to all norms, guidelines and principles required to be scrupulously followed UNDER statutory power under Section 38 of the BDA Act of 1976 (in short referred to as 'BDA Act'). However, it emanates from Section 38 of the amended BDA Act and Section 9 of the Validation Act, the resolution passed on 17-11-1982 which is within the two cut off dates is enforceable Assistant commissioner(R&R) need to execute the sale deeds forth with in favor ofSri Muniswamy s/o Abbaiahas per resolution number 378 dated 17-11-1982.Sri Muniswamy s/o Abbaiahas per resolution number 378 dated 17-11-1982 has acquired legal rights for re-conveyance.BDA should to stop exhibiting the style of functioning in a dictatorial manner either without understanding the statutory provisions, law laid down in a catena of decisions, violating rule of law or in utter ignorance of law. BDA cannot exercised powers illegally, arbitrarily and discriminately giving a go-bye to all norms, guidelines and principles required to be scrupulously followed for under Section 38-C of the BDA Act of 1976 (in short referred to as 'BDA Act'). No bribe no work?. For several years legitimate files are pending in re-convey section of BDA. It seems nothing happens without paying bribe in Re-convey section . BDA should to stop exhibiting the style of functioning in a dictatorial manner either without understanding the statutory provisions, law laid down in a catena of decisions, violating rule of law or in utter ignorance of law.BDA need to execute sale deed to Sri Muniswamy s/o Abbaiahas per resolution number 378 dated 17-11-1982 . Cancel sale deed executed by BDA in respect of site no 1198 and 1199 HAL II stage as site allotted were illegal Sri Muniswamy s/o Abbaiahhas Submitted the true copies of Documents 0n 10-08-2015 (signed by Gazetted officer or Notarised )as per Assistant commissioner(R&R)letter AC/R&R/50/15-16 Dated 27-07-2015 in respect of Re-Conveyance and execution of absolute Sale deed in Survey Number 50 Dookanhalli Indra Nagar Post, HAL 2ND StageBangalore: 560038 (Facing 100 feet Road) as per resolution in Subject No. 378 by the Bangalore Development Authority's meeting dated 17-11-1982 as per Section 5 of the Amendment Act introduced Section 38-C in the Act and Section 9 of the Amendment Act validated the allotments made between 20.12.1973 to 8.5.1986 retrospectively.