JOIN USArkavathi Layout allottees stare at loss of sites
The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) denotification saga in Arkavathi Layout continues to sting people who have been waiting for close to a decade to secure a piece of land in their name.
Subsequent to the revelation that the BDA has denotified at least five acres in Jakkur village, Arkavathi Layout allottees are now apprehensive about denotification in other parts of the layout.
Taking shelter under Supreme Court verdict in the Bondu Ramaswamy Vs State of Karnataka case, the BDA has been telling site allottees that their land comes under “re-do” category.
This effectively suggests that their sites have been let go off, without serving them any legally tenable notice for raising objections on denotification of the sites registered in their name.
Vishwanath (55), got registered his site on July 6, 2009. Till December 2013, he dreamt of constructing a house on 40x60 sq ft site in Thanisandra. However an accidental meeting with his friend, earlier this year, shattered his dreams.
“I was told by my friend that several high-rise buildings were coming up in and around my site. Alarmed by this development, I visited the location in January this year, only to find that the entire approach road and the SWD lines laid by the BDA had been demolished and repossessed by some unknown parties,” said Vishwanath, who had secured the site after six failed attempts since 1984.
The shell shocked allottee was told by BDA officials at its RT Nagar office that survey number 86/1 (3.6 acres) of Thanisandra on which his site and that of 54 others were formed, had been denotified.
At the other end, on survey no 38/1 in Sampigehalli, S Suryanarayan also faced a similar situation in December 2013.
“When I questioned the BDA commissioner, he enquired with the executive engineer, who told that the land was under re-do case. This meant that the said land, along with my site, was denotified,” he said. Suryanarayan claimed that at least 12 other sites on the same survey number have been denotified.
However, the verdict in Bondu Ramaswamy case, also suggests: “But where many land losers have accepted the acquisition and received the compensation, and where possession of considerable portions of acquired lands has already been taken, and development activities have been carried out by laying plots and even making provisional or actual allotments, those factors have to be taken note of, while granting relief.”
Notice mandatory
The High Court of Karnataka in Vyalikaval HBCS Vs State of Karnataka and others, (2010) held that despite the apex court holding the acquisition of land bad, changing the khata in the revenue record in favour of the landlords without serving a notice to the affected parties is against the principles of natural justice.
The Arkavathi Layout Allottees’ Association claims that more than 8,813 allottees had not been given an opportunity to file their objection for the denotification of their sites.BDA Commissioner Sham Bhatt, speaking to Deccan Herald, admitted that some of the allottees may not have been served the notices.
“While I agree that they may not have been served the notices due to change of address or other issues, we have issued the notices to all those whose sites have been lost in the re-do cases,” said Bhatt.