Sri Chandrashekar vs The Additional Land Acquisition Officer and The Commissioner Bangalore Development Authority

H.N. Nagamohan Das, J.—In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the notice dated 23.3.2010 as pi Annexure-D issued by the first respondent and the same reads as under:

NOTICE

Sub: Property in Sy. No. 31/1 of Devasandra Village

This has reference to order mid judgment dt: 15/11/2002 passed by the City Civil Court in O.S. No. 4765/97 the operative portion of which is extracted below.

The defendant is hereby perpetually restrained from obstructing the plaintiff in the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property.

It is further ordered and decreed that, the defendant is restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff without due process of law.

In pursuance of the judgment dt: 15/11/2002 this Authority is holding and enquiry and Spot inspection on 06/04/2010 you are called upon to he present with all the documents on which you intend to rely on in order to complete the enquiry.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no need to hold the enquiry and to conduct spot inspection by the first respondent. If that is so, the petitioner is always at liberty to reply to the impugned notice and to take all contentions available to him. At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner brought to my notice that the petitioner has already replied to the impugned notice through his lawyer on 3.4.2010. In the circumstances, I decline to interfere at this stage with regard to the impugned notice. Respondents are under an obligation to consider the reply sent by the petitioner in accordance with law.

With the above observation, this writ petition is hereby-disposed without reference to respondents.