“Indian DEMOCRACY is in DANGER; when 867 Judges, who have NEVER Learned
to OBEY the LAW Are given THE RIGHT to COMMAND”
To ABORT ANARCHY & Make India Corruption Free:
Prosecute & Jail Corrupt 867 Judges = Activate JUDICIARY
 Judicial Layout: High Court tells HBCS to submit plan by June 30 – 2 June 2016 Deccan Herald
……………..NEWS IN DETAIL …………
 Judicial Layout: High Court tells HBCS to submit plan by June 30 – 2 June 2016 Deccan Herald
The High Court on Wednesday directed the Karnataka State Judicial Department Employees’ House Building Co-operative Society to prepare a plan for the 194-acre Judicial Layout and submit it to the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for sanction by June 30.
A division bench comprising Justices Ram Mohan Reddy and H Billappa, while disposing of a 14-year-old PIL, directed the BDA to inspect the layout, conduct a physical verification and submit a report to the state government in accordance with the BDA Act and Town and Country Planning Act, within four months. The bench ordered the state government to act on the report within one month of receiving it.
The Judicial Layout Residents’ and Site Owners’ Association and retired judges had moved the court seeking a CBI probe into the affairs of the HBCS. The petitioners had contended that the office-bearers of the HBCS had sold the land reserved for civic amenities by converting them into residential sites, in violation of the approved layout plan.
The bench directed the BBMP to go ahead with the compendium report on developing the CA sites and complete the process in six months.
It dropped the contempt petition filed against the society for violating the court’s order which had restrained the society from selling any sites in said layout.
Disposing of the oldest case against the mismanagement of the Karnataka State Judicial Department Employees House Building Society (KSJDEHBC), the High Court issued a fresh lease of life to the ‘Judicial Layout.’
On Wednesday, the HC, in its order, said that the society has not obtained necessary sanction and plan approval for its layout. However, it has been granted time till June 30 to make fresh application in this regard. While theBangalore Development Authority (BDA) scrutinises its application and the government takes a decision on it over the next four months, the existing allotment of sites and the houses that have come up on it will not face any action.
The Judicial Layout Residents and Site Holders Association, which filed the petition back in 2002, had made several allegations against the society. The layout has been mired in controversy for the last 15 years.
There were also allegations that land meant for civic amenities was converted into residential sites. 35 per cent of the total land was supposed to be meant for civic amenities. The layout, on 193 acres of land, had in its original plan provided for 11 parks and five civic amenity sites. Large scale violation of the Town and Country Planning Act had been alleged.
But that was only one of the allegations and cases against the society. The biggest allegation was that around 500 sites were illegally allotted, and that allottees include former and current judges who cannot be considered ‘judicial’ or ‘government employees.’ It was also alleged that people who could not have been members were allotted sites, and they then sold land to third parties for real market value. The BBMP has been directed to complete the process of marking the civic sites within six months.
The division bench that cleared the 2002 case on Wednesday also ordered that the society would not sell any more sites till the government decides on granting permission for the layout. However, it dropped the contempt proceedings against the society for violating the court order and selling sites.
Your honour, Your Honour? 18 Nov, 2011 DNA News
Senior Counsel Ravivarma Kumar [In 2015 Karnataka High Court Advocate General ] says, “The entire judicial employees housing society is a black mark on Karnataka judiciary. It is in the interest of the judiciary to publish a white paper giving all the details of site allotments in favour of various members and to publish the same for the benefit of public scrutiny.”
Justice is blind, but judges have site: 82 judges have been allotted plots of land at dirt cheap rates in Karnataka in violation of rules; and in doing so they have also disregarded various judgments of high court and Supreme Court
The Karnataka government’s search for a suitable candidate for the Lokayukta’s post may come to a naught. Documents and sale deeds available with DNA show that at least 82 judges – both sitting and retired – of the Supreme Court and the Karnataka high court have been allotted sites meant for judicial employees. It was exactly for this reason that former Justice Santosh Hegde’s successor, Justice Shivraj V Patil, had to resign as the Lokayukta followed by his deputy, Justice R Gururajan.
The sites in question were allotted to the judges at concessional rates by the Karnataka Judicial Employees House Building Co-operative Society in alleged violation of its own bye-laws.
House building cooperative societies, by definition, are mean
t for the poor and needy. Essentially, for employees who cannot afford to buy land or a house at market rates.
Moreover, such allotments are meant only for employees of the judicial department, who are government servants. Numerous judgments by high court and Supreme Court have held that judges are constitutional authorities and not judicial employees.
For instance, in the case of Union of India vs Sankal Chand Himatlal Sheth and others, on September 19, 1977, a five-judge constitutional Bench observed: “A judge of the high court is not a government servant, but he is the holder of a constitutional office. He is as much part of the State as the executive government… In fact, a High Court Judge has no employer: he occupies a high constitutional office…”
The observation by the Karnataka high court in the case of Narayan Reddy vs State of Karnataka was reported (in ILR 1991 KAR2248) as: “In case of House Building societies formed in respect of employees of any organisation or industry, the membership should be confined only to the employees who may continue as members even after retirement and the Societies should be prohibited from enrolling outsiders as members.”
This indicates that only employees of the judicial department —and not retired or sitting judges — are eligible to become members of the society and be allotted sites at concessional rates.
Justice MF Saldanha, who retired from as a judge of the Karnataka high court, agrees. “You have to be a judicial employee and the second requirement is that you cannot have an allotment in any other society to get a site. A cooperative society is a special privilege. Only people who need houses can avail the sites there. A high court or a Supreme Court judge is a constitutional functionary, not a judicial employee. Hence they cannot avail the sites.”
The list in possession of DNA shows that former chief justice of Chhattisgarh high court (2002-2004), Justice KHN Kuranga, whose name is doing the rounds as the ideal successor to Hegde as Karnataka Lokayukta, is among the 82 judges who were allotted sites in violation of the Society’s bye-laws.
Justice Kuranga was allotted a 9,600-sq ft plot of land under Allalasandra, Chikkabommasandra and Jakkur Plantation villages and Yelahanka hobli in March 2000 for just `2.94 lakh. The current market value is `3.84 crore.
Justice Kuranga says: “Yes I have bought a site. I became a member of Judicial Employees House Building Co-operative Society and then bought the site. How far is it a violation, you will have to ask the society.”
Justice Kuranga may not see it as a violation but Justice SNDhingra, who retired as a judge of the Delhi high court sees it in a different light. He says: “Getting plots from executive is contrary to our judicial ethics. All these favours do not come for free; even a cup of tea is not free these days. So when a favour is taken something is expected in return too.”
The list also includes Justice S R Bannurmath’s name, whom chief minister DV Sadananda Gowda wants to install as the next Lokayukta. Justice Bannurmath was allotted a site in Allalasandra, Chikkabommasandra and Jakkur Plantation villages by the Society as per a sale deed dated September 19, 2001. He bought the 6,600-sq ft plot for `2.02 lakh, but the current market value of the plot is `2.64 crore.
Senior Counsel Ravivarma Kumar says, “The entire judicial employees housing society is a black mark on Karnataka judiciary. It is in the interest of the judiciary to publish a white paper giving all the details of site allotments in favour of various members and to publish the same for the benefit of public scrutiny.”
He adds: “It is very unfortunate that the chief minister of the state has said there is no suitable person to adorn the post of Lokayukta. This layout has become a nightmare for the judiciary. It should be put to an end at the earliest.”
Former chairman of Karnataka Bar Council, Sadashiv Reddy, says, “The Judges have definitely violated the bye-laws. Judicial Employees House Building Co-operative Society is meant only for members of judiciary which includes only the district and the subordinate judges and not the high court judges. Hence there has been a violation.”
However, former Advocate General of Karnataka High Court Uday Holla says the Supreme Court had dismissed a petition challenging allotment of sites to high court judges by such societies. The petitioners had challenged that as per the bye-laws the sitting judges of the high court cannot get sites at the Judicial employees House building Co-operative Society which is meant only for members of the judiciary (judicial employees).
Be that as it may, accepting sites at concessional rates (and, in some cases, accepting multiple sites) should go against the morality of men of justice.
Retired Delhi High Court Justice RS Sodhi says, “This practice should stop. These things are a blot on our democratic set up. Once you, as a Judge, start taking favours, a wrong message goes out to the society which is bad for our institution as a whole.”
DNBAN50032 | 11/18/2011 | Author : Team DNA | WC :980 | City-Bangalore
Site allotment plot thickens:
Judges of SC also ignored society rules Saturday, 19 November 2011
Prominent sitting and retired judges of Supreme Court ignored observations of the apex court and Karnataka high court while being allotted sites
Two former Chief Justices of India, two sitting and seven retired judges of the Supreme Court are among a long list of judges who have availed of plots of land not meant for them. The judges in question did not comply with the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, and its bye-laws while buying land at concessional rates. Worse, in the process they disregarded observations and judgments made by Supreme Court and Karnataka high court.
DNA is in possession of documents that show that two sitting judges of the Supreme Court, Justices TS Thakur and HL Dattu, were allotted sites after they became members of Karnataka State Judicial Employees House Building Co-operative Society in violation of Clauses 10 (B) and 53 of its bye-laws.
Clause 10 (B) says that only an “employee of the judicial department in Karnataka” who “has put in a minimum continuous or intermittent service of five years in Karnataka” is eligible for allotment of a site.
And Clause 53 says that “the society shall allot sites/flats/houses only to members who are eligible as per bye-law number10.”
However, according to the Constitution, judges do not qualify to be judicial employees.
Article 124 (2) of the Constitution says that Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President by warrant under his hand. High Court judges, according to Article 217, Clause-1, are appointed by the President. This, in effect, means that they cannot be considered employees of any state government’s judicial department.
But in violation of this, Justice Thakur was allotted site number 1,273 in the Judicial Layout in Yelahanka in 1996-97 when he was a sitting judge at the Karnataka High Court. He paid Rs1.54 lakh for a site measuring 5,436 sq ft. The present market value of that site is estimated to be Rs2.17 crore.
And Justice Dattu was allotted site number 2095 in the same layout for which he paid Rs61,598 in 1997-98 (present market value is around Rs1 crore) . He was also a sitting judge of the Karnataka High Court then.
The eight retired judges – Justices GT Nanavati, RV Raveendran, MN Venkatachalaiah (who was Chief Justice of India from February 1993 to October 1994), S Rajendra Babu, P Venkatarama Reddi, former Karnataka Lokayuktas NG Venkatachala and Shivraj V Patil, and K Jagannatha Shetty – also violated the same clauses of the Karnataka Co-operative Society Act, 1959, when they were allotted sites by the society.
According to documents available with DNA, Justice Nanavati (who headed the one-man inquiry commission probing the post-Godhra riots) was allotted site number 2070 for Rs61,598 (present market value is around Rs 1 crore) on October 14, 1999, at Yelahanka Judicial Layout. He was also the Chief Justice of Karnataka from September 1994-March 1995 and Chief Justice of Orissa from January 1994-September 1994.
In accepting the site, Justice Nanavati violated section 10 (b) and 10 (c) of the Society bye-laws which state that members should have spent at least five years working in the Judicial Department, and should have lived in the ‘territorial jurisdiction’ of the society for not less than 10 years. The ‘territorial jurisdiction’, in this society is limited to BDA limits.
Venkatachalaiah, the former Chief Justice of India, was allotted site number 1295 measuring 5,400 sq ft in 1997-98 for Rs1.53 lakh (present market value Rs2.16 crore) and S Rajendra Babu who served as a CJI from May to June 2004, was allotted site number 1389 measuring 9,605 sq ft in 1994-95 for Rs4.44 lakh (present market value Rs3.84 crore) when he was a judge at the High Court of Karnataka.
The other four retired judges, according to the documents, have also violated the mentioned Act and are not in compliance with the Supreme Court and High Court observations.
Justice Venkatachaliah told DNA: “Some time in 1987 a representation was made to the state government that judges have to become members of the society. After which a 3-member committee was constituted for this. The then chief minister has sanctioned the sites for Judges. Pursuant to it, the bye-laws were amended. In 1997, when I was high court Judge, I was allotted a 60×90 plot.”
Retired Delhi High Court Justice SN Dhingra put it bluntly: “Getting plots from executive is contrary to our judicial ethics. All these favours do not come for free; even a cup of tea is not free these days. So when a favour is taken something is expected in return too.”
JUDICIAL Employees HBCS, Karnataka High Court; ILLEGALLY developed & Judicial Layout in Criminal Contempt of 27 Judgments, as filed by JUDICIAL Employees HBCS in WP PIL 40994/2002, WP. PIL 7105/2007
“Judicial Layout Illegalities & Judge’s In-Eligibility & Criminal Culpability makes Karnataka Lokayukta Shivaraj Patil resign“ Why NOT SCI CJI H.L. Dattu ,Thakur & Gopal Gowda
JUDICIAL ILLEGAL Layout = FRAUD,FORGERY, LAND-GRABING 34 ACREs = Revenue Layout:[Video NDTV ]
- News X TV Video: “Judicial Layout Illegalities & Judge’s In-Eligibility & Criminal Culpability makes Karnataka Lokayukta Shivaraj Patil resign“ Why NOT CJI Dattu ,Thakur & Gopal Gowda?
- TV9 – Lokayukta Shivraj Patil Quits Over Housing Plot Row Judicial Layout! Why Not CJI Dattu & Thakur?
- Conspiracy of Judiciary & Ministers: Digvijay Mote to NDTV – Video; at Mote’s Office
- Karnataka Joint Legislature Committee on Land Grabbing in Bangalre, Chairman Mr. A.T.Ramaswamy Judicial Layout Visit.[ Video 6]
- “JUDGES R Corupt” “No One Dares To Complain Against:-
Lok Ayukta Santhosh Hegde.TV9.
- Walk The Talk with Justice Santosh Hegde[ Video ]
- “Rampant Corruption in Judiciary & Lok Ayukta”
Digvijay Mote.adrsing.CJI .vidhana Soudha, Blore precincts. .8mins
- Digvijay Mote, Editor http://indiancorruptjudges.com/ ; Interview with Justice N. Santosh Hegde –
[ 02 ]
[ 03 ]
[ 04 ]
- JUDICIAL ILLEGAL Layout = FRAUD,FORGERY, LAND-GRABING 34 ACREs = Revenue Layout:[Video NDTV ]
- Mr.Mote , Editor http://indiancorruptjudges.com/ ; Interview in KANNADA Language with “A.T. Ramaswamy, Chairman, Karnataka Joint Legislature Committee On Land Grabbing of Lands in Bangalore”
26 Dec 2006.
[Part – 02 Video ] https://youtu.be/ytTnsj_YwI8?list=FLcwbLyOlpVmzdr3Bxynnpyg
- Co-Op Minister:Judicial Layout Bangalore, Superseded [ Video ]
- Karnataka Joint Legislature Committee on Land Grabbing in Bangalre, Chairman Mr. AT Ramaswamy Last Press Conference 29 Dec 2007[ Video] https://youtu.be/kPC24mnPr9c?list=FLcwbLyOlpVmzdr3Bxynnpyg
- Karnataka Joint Legislature Committee on Land Grabbing in Bangalre, Chairman Mr. A.T.Ramaswamy Judicial Layout Visit.8 [Video ]
- Judicial Layout, Bangalore = Illegal Layout; being REGULARIZED by BBMP Commissioner , on Karnataka HC DB directions in WP 40994/2002 Pt. 1. [ Video ]
- Legal Eagle: Advocate S. Vasudev; JUDGES should surrender Sites.
[ Video ]. https://youtu.be/oT_XusUqPEk?list=FLcwbLyOlpVmzdr3Bxynnpyg
- Karnataka High Court P.I.L Advocate Nagraj .Y.N. Judicial Layout, Bangalore = Illegal Layout [Video ] https://youtu.be/oT_XusUqPEk?list=FLcwbLyOlpVmzdr3Bxynnpyg
- News X TV Video: “Judicial Layout Illegalities & Judge’s In-Eligibility & Criminal Culpability makes Karnataka Lokayukta Shivaraj Patil resign“
- Corrupt S.C. Judge R.V.Raveendran At-Last Opts-Out of AMBANI GAS WAR[ Video ]
- Forefeit Judicial Layout: AT Ramaswamy Press Conference 29 Dec 2007
- [ 01 ] [ 02 ] [ 03 ].
Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar made-it-become-true . .Vande Mataram . . Indian National Song. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV-xzIeeYXU %5D
- News X TV Video: “Judicial Layout Illegalities & Judge’s In-Eligibility & Criminal Culpability makes Karnataka Lokayukta Shivaraj Patil resign” [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQQo0qU1qB0 ]
- Need clean men in black robes: CJI[ Video] = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtSs1KBdo2Y&feature=fvwrel
- NewsX Video: Indian judiciary splits wide open . = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAFpReJGclA&list=PL8D49820FAFEB9CB1&index=12&feature=plpp_video
- Loksabha Debating on “Corruption in Indian Judiciary” [ video ]
- Judges to blame for fallen image: Ex-CJI[ Video ] .Former CJI J.S. Verma; on judicial corruption[ Video] = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhjLk2Sg9mM&feature=relmfu
- Judgments-JUSTICE-for-Sale. Punjab Vigilance . .CJ:T.S. Thakur
… [ Video]. = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKg7yzdYRqI
- Justice Bhagwati on judicial corruption and appointment of judges
[ Video ] . = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFOPVABSjnk&feature=related
- Judges Caught Cheating in Law Exam in India [ Video ] [ English & Telugu Video ]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i1hgoCSQ-s&feature=fvwrel
- CJI Justice4Sale= Worst Chief Justice of India . Master of Corrupt Judges: KGB [ video ] = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPhG0HTNsUY&feature=relmfu
- Mote to CJI Balakrishna [ 01 ] [ 02 ]= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IewT0JcIE4
- CJI KGB Vs CJ:- Corrupt CJI Safe Guards Minister Raja . . hid Raja facts: SC judge.
[ Video ] = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6cvIcySb38&feature=relate
- [ 01 ] [ 02 ] [ 03 ].
http://indiancorruptjudges.com/Plot4Plot/077_08s.htm#03.Kar Judicial Layout
|High Court coercing B.D.A & Govt for Compromise = Bangalore into SLUM !|
|2005||Bangalore SLUM = Government files Affidavit: 867 Judges’ Lay-out not Approved by BDA & is Illegal. 156 Acres Acquired by Society. 40 Acres by Land-Grabbing.|
|2004:||Affidavit of 867 Judges Society in present Case: B.D.A. Never Approved Lay-out.|
|1999:||193 Acres Lay-out NOT Approved B.D.A reply to Lok Ayukta|
|1995||Judgment: 28 Sitting Judges 193 Acres Lay-out Approved : FRAUD Judgment|
|1994||FRAUD Judgment: 867 JUDGES’ Judgment:
Lay-out Approved by B.D.A+ Relinquished CA sites of 96 Acres !All Fraud!
|Conspiracies||Government not pleading to re-open all cases & Judgments secured by 867 JUDGES by FRAUD. Since 15 years = 867 Judges’ Conspiracy with CMs.|
|Bangalore Infrastructure Collapsed Judges Role Models = 3,20,000 Acres = SLUM|
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
W.P.NO. 40994 OF 2002 (LB-PIL)
Judicial Layout Residents and Site
Holders Association (Regd.)
By Board of Directors. : Petitioners
Bangalore Development Authority
and Others : Respondents.
REPORT SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT No. 2
- It is submitted that in obedience to the directions of this Hon’ble Court, this respondent got a survey of the lands conducted by the Revenue Department and also enquired in to this matter with the relevant authorities and perused the records produced. It is found certain inconsistency in the layout of the 4th respondent –society as narrated hereinafter:-
- At the outset, it is respectfully submitted that the land for the purpose of formation of a layout of the members of the 4th respondent – society was acquired to an extent of 156 acres 26 guntas in various Sy. Nos. of Allalasandra, Jakkur, Chikkabommasandra Villages vide notification No. RD 156 AQB 84, date: 24-1-1989. copies of the 4(1) and 6(1) Notifications are herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURES R1 and R2 respectively. This acquired land was handed over to the 4th respondent – society by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, vide his O.M. Date: 13-11-1992 and 2-9-1994. copies of the said O.Ms. are produced and marked as ANNEXURES R3 and R4 respectively.
- But, after the survey was conducted afresh, now it has revealed that the land in possession of the said society is to an extent of 190 acres 07 ¼ Guntas. This survey further reveals that the society is in occupation of 33 acres 21 guntas of land, which is in excess of the area actually acquired and handed over in favour of the society by the Government. Further probe in the matter has revealed that R.T.C. of this excess land stands in the name of 21 original land owners. There are no records in the Revenue Department to show now the lands have come in to the possession of the 4th respondent – society. It is also relevant to mention that provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act prohibits the societies to purchase and hold agricultural lands without obtaining permission, and as such, the society has to explain how they have one in to possession of this excess land, because, till this date, no such permissions have been taken. It is also relevant to mention that these excess lands continue to be agricultural lands in the records even to-day. Under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, agricultural lands cannot be utilized for any other purpose unless converted for that purpose. As per the available records, no such permission has been given under the Land Revenue Act. Hence, as per the available records, the possession and utilization of these 33 acres 21 guntas of land by the society for the residential purpose is unauthorized and illegal.
- It is respectfully submitted that the Bangalore Development Authority, is the planning Authority for the area in which these lands are situated and as per section 17 of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, it is only the planning Authority which is competent to approve the sub-division of lands. Therefore, approval of a layout can be done only by the planning Authority. The Bangalore Development Authority has categorically stated that no approval has been given by them for this layout of the 4th respondent society.
- It is further submitted that the C.M.C. Yelahanka, which is a urban local body encompassing the said layout has also stated that they have not approved this layout plan and even otherwise, the C.M.C. is not competent under law to approve this layout plan. It has come to light that there is one plan which has been attached with a letter submitted by the secretary of the society to the C.M.C. Date: 18-5-2002. to which an un-registered relinquishment deed and a layout plan is enclosed, which is herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURES R5 to R7. This layout plan contains an endorsement by the then chief officer of the Municipality to the effect that “plan is approved as per the council resolution No. 24, Date: 22-5-1996. It would be relevant to point out at this place itself that the layout plan is not signed by any office bearer of the 4th respondent –society and the relinquishment deed is also not signed by the C.M.C. and is not registered.
- It is respectfully submitted that the resolution No. 24, Date: 22-5-1996, which is herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURE R8, referred to above in the said endorsement is only with regard to collection of development charges and opening of kathas and giving building permissions as per circular of the Directorate of Municipal Administration Date: 17-4-1990 which permits the local body to collect the development charges for the formation of the entire layout and it is not regarding approval of the layout. No documents regarding the approval of the layout plan are available in any of the records of the C.M.C., Yelahanka Under these circumstances, it is doubtful as to the purported endorsement of the then Chief Officer and it is suspected that this document could have been fabricated.
- It is further submitted that as could be seen from the said resolution, the society had already developed the layout by forming roads, drains, underground drainage, electrification etc. Therefore, the question of approval of the layout in 1996 does not arise.
- It is submitted that Annexure to the writ petition makes it amply clear that the 4th respondent society itself has Acknowledged in September, 2002 that legally the layout cannot be approved by the C.M.C. and it has to be got approved by the Bangalore Development Authority. Thus, even by September, 2002, the layout was an un-approved, un-authorised layout.
- It is respectfully submitted that the society had again submitted an application for opining of kathas for 35 acres ¼ guntas, for which the then Town Municipal Council vide resolution No. 6 Date: 11-12-1996 resolved to open the kathas for the additional area by collecting development charges at Rs. 25/- per sq. mtr. For the entire area and further resolved ant society should hand over all the public places.
- It is further submitted that the society has submitted a relinquishment deed for C.A. sites and parks enclosing a layout map of 193 acres 2 ¼ guntas Date: 18-5-2002, which is unsigned and un-registered. Since the layout plan has not been sanctioned by the competent authority, the exact location of civic amenities sites, parks and playgrounds etc., are not known to the C.M.C., Yelahanka. The layout plan attached to the relinquishment deed not bear signature of any of the office bearers of the society. It is also relevant to note that the entire extent of land shown in the layout plan is not in the possession of the society, particularly the lands shown as C.A. sites.
- It is respectfully submitted that on verification it is found that there is a letter issued by the commissioner, C.M.C., Yelahanka, on 23-1-2003 to the society stating that as reported by the Town planning Officer all the civic amenities sited, parks, playgrounds, drains, water supply have been banded over to the CMC and the society has been asked to pay the balance of the development charges. But, as seen from the note sheet of the file maintained by the CMC, the Town Planning Officer has recorded that he along with Mr. Murthurayappa, Revenue Inspector has inspected the lands and that the civic amenities sites, parks, roads etc. have been identified in the layout plan approved by the Chief Officer, Yelahanka, Date: 31-5-1996 are all available on site. This fact was placed for the perusal of the commissioner and the commissioner has not taken further action on this. But, a letter has been issued on 21-3-2003 as stated above. There is no mention in the records or on file how this letter came to be issued. The file was next seen by the next commissioner on 12-9-2003 who has again asked the Town Planning Officer to verify and locate park and open space. Copy of the note sheet is herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURE R9. There are no records to show that parks, C.A. sites and other civic amenities have been handed over actually to the C.M.C. since C.A. sites have not been handed over nor the actual location of these sites known to the CMC, the question of protecting the CA sites does not arise. It is respectfully submitted that legally the C.A. sites, parks and open spaces have to be handed over to B.D.A. and not to the C.M.C., Yelahanka. As stated above, it the 4th respondent society even till September, 2002 has not got the layout plan approved, the question of relinquishment of C.A. sites and parks does not arise.
- It is respectfully submitted that on comparison of the layout plan submitted by the society along with their relinquishment deed and the survey map now prepared by the Revenue Department, which is herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURE R10 brings out a strange situation that the society has shown some of the C.A. sites, parks and open site on the private lands which are not owned by them, and are not in their possession. They have gone to the extent of showing some third party lands as park belonging to their layout, as could be seen from the two maps. As a matter of fact, a portion of Sy. No. 95/2 of Allalasandra village measuring 1.26 guntas which is shown as C.A. site in the layout plan has recently been converted for non-agricultural purpose in favour of original owner by the Deputy Commissioner by his order Date: 14-10-2003. Therefore, it goes to show that the society is not in possession of these lands and the original land owners are in possession of these lands.
- It is respectfully submitted that as per the Zonal Regulations of the B.D.A. under the KTCP Act prevailing in the Bangalore Metropolitan Area, the maximum permissible sital area for residential purpose is 50%and area to be reserved for park and C.A. sites is 15 + 10% and the remaining for roads and other purposes. As seen from the layout map available in the records, the sital area works out to 64.73% as against permissible limit of 50% and parks and open space is only 5% against minimum of 25%. The details worked out and the measurement of the land use are herewith produced and marked asANNEXURE R11. The layout plan shows 2268 sites. Such a large number of sites could be shown only by using the land required to be reserved for park and civic amenities for residential purposes.
Dated : 03-06-2005.
HIGH COURT GOVT. ADVOCATE
ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT No. 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
WRIT PETITION NO. 40994 OF 2002 (LB-PIL )
Judicial Layout Residents and Site
Holders Association (Regd..)
By Board of Directors. PETITIONERS/S
Bangalore Development Authority
and Others RESPONDENTS
A F F I D A V I T
VERIFYING THE REPORT
I, P. Ravi Kumar, aged about 43 years, Son of P. Gopala Reddy do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows:-
- I am working as Secretary to Government of Karnataka, Urban Development Department, Bangalore.
I have read the Petition and Affidavit filed by the Petitioner and I have acquainted myself with the facts of the case from the records made available to me. I am authorized to swear to this Affidavit.
- The Statement made in paragraphs 1 to 13 of the Report accompanying this Affidavit are based on the information and records made available to me and I believe them to be true.
- I state the Exhibits 1 to 11 produced along with the report are true copies of the originals.
Dated : 3rd June 2005.
FNJPC = ALL JUDGES; including LOWEST-of-Low , R Constitutional Functionaries like Ministers etc.,
15. We want to impress upon the Government that the debilitating effects of inadequate remuneration of the judges in the long run can only lead to worsening morale and eroding commitment to service. It is the universal experience that men and women who feel that they are underpaid for the demanding work they do, would generally suffer from low morale and declining sense of commitment to service. This is, indeed, happening in many State Judiciaries. The losers are, however, not the judges in the ultimate analysis, rather it is the public. The public have to go before courts for critical decisions in cases affecting law and order, cases that affect their civil and legal rights, cases involving their lives and liberties and cases relating to their welfare and their children’s welfare, etc.. We can ill-afford to entrust such cases in the hands of dissatisfied judges.
|16. “The laborer is worthy of his hire; and if you do not give him the wages of honesty, it is to be apprehended the wages of corruption may, in process of time, come to be sought.”
Click Here 16
|19. We are only trying to set the salary at a level that allows aspirants with modest backgrounds, and with family responsibilities, to accept the challenge of judicial service and a level that does not progressively penalize those dedicated individuals who choose to serve. We are trying to be fair to those who are making sacrifices – in terms of loneliness and general withdrawal from community affairs – to serve the public.
Click Here 19
We R Employees: Adamantly admit Chief Justices of India +
But; Alas, JUDGES’ inherent Lust, Corrupt Intents with Un-bridled Constitutional Privileges, Judges are ready to barter Courts & Judgments; for any Illegal Profits including Plots / Sites meant for “Karnataka State Employees”.
How Karnataka Upa lokayukta HUSHED-Up SCAM;
While Hunting Down Executive & Legislature
Index To “COMPT/UPLOK/BCD-64/99-2000 ;Typed Documents”
 http://lokayukta.kar.nic.in/: Latest Case Status / Status of the complaint : COMPT/UPLOK/BCD/64/1999
Regn. date:4/12/1999 “SUO-MOTU INVESTIGATION,Closed 13/3/2002
Allegation in brief: ” JUDICIAL LAYOUT, Bangalore ‘IRREGULARITIES, NEPOTISM AND CORRUPT ACTIVITIES IN ALLOT- MENT OF SITES’”.
Respondentant: SHIVALINGAIAH, PRESIDENT,KAR.STATE JUDL. DEPT.EMP.HOUSE BLGD.CO-OP.SOCIETY, High Court of Karnataka, BANGALORE
 http://lokayukta.kar.nic.in/ Latest Case Status / Status of the complaint : COMPT/UPLOK/BCD/125/2000
Regn. date:7/8/2000. Latest stage-Closed 13/3/2002.
First complainant-SUO-MOTU INVESTIGATION.
First Respondent-N.SHIVANNA.,54,3RD CRS. KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR LAKSHMIPUR BANGALORE
Allegation in brief:- “JUDICIAL Layout, Bangalore ‘VIOLATION OF RULES IN ALLOT MENT OF SITES IN KSJDEHBCS BANGALORE’”
- 01.“Part-1.4pgs. of 90 pgs-LayOutPlan Copying” Compt/uplok/BCD/-64/99-2000/164
- 02.File Notings Typed [Order Sheet] 90 pgs. Up-Lokayukta BCD 64 1999 .doc being corected as on 1 July.13
- 03-A. Interim Stay Order in UpLok/BCD/64 of Upa Lokayukta Justice G.P.Shivaprakash. 18 Jan,2001
- 03-B. UpLok.Interim-Order. Restraining Sites registration.18Jan,2001
- Up-Lok Directn :Answers to be elicited in respect of “Selling off Road to Lokayukta Y.Bhaskar Rao; the then Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court- 12 July 2000”
- 04. CJ M.Ramkrishna Letter to Upa Lok 7, Mar, 2001; CJ & CM Conspiracies
Mr. JUSTICE M. RAMAKRISHNA Res: No. 3792, Ist Floor,
CHIEF JUSTICE [ Rtd] 7th Main, HAL IInd Stage,
BANGALORE – 560 038.
Ph. : 5250475
My dear Justice Shiva Prakash,
Sub: Registration of Document in respect of Site No. 858 – The Karnataka State Judicial Officers House Building Co-op. Society Ltd., Jakkur, Bangalore.
Ref: Your Letter No. Compt Upa Lokayukta BCD.64/99-2000 ARE-2 Dt. 18-1-2001.
– – – Letter ; means Upa Lokayukta Stay of Sites Registration =
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
I write to inform you that during my service as Judge of the Karnataka High Court at Bangalore, on 4-1-1993, a site was allotted to me in the above layout measuring 80’ x 120’ . I had paid part of the value of the site at that time. As you are aware I was elevated and posted as the Chief Justice of Jammu and Kashmir where I assumed charge as such on the 26th October, 1994.
As you are also aware that no certain prescribed procedure had been adopted for allotment of sites in the above layout for Hon’ble Judges and other staff members of the Judiciary. However having paid the initial amount, I left Bangalore and began to serve in Jammu and Kashmir High Court. From there I was shifted to Gauhati High Court, Assam, and on retirement on the 14th april 1998 when I came back to Bangalore, to my surprise I was informed by Mr. Shivalingaiah, the President of the Society that on account of certain orders of injunction of certain civil court, the registration of my site was postponed despite the fact that I paid the entire amount of Rs. 4,34,650/-. including registration charges and stamp duty as per law.
Eversince then, the authorities of the Society had been dodging me to register the document of my site. However on persuasion the authorities have passed formal orders of allotment of site bearing 858 in the above layout on 3-1-2001 and an endorsement has been given to me. Therein it is indicated that the entire amount of site value of Rs. 4,34,650/- had been paid, besides indicating that this is as per the proceedings of 4-1-1993. For ready reference, I am enclosing herewith the copy of the allotment letter.
…….. Page 2 …….
A few days earlier one Sri Ramakrishna an employee of the Society informed me on the phone that the document for purpose of registration of the above site had been prepared and submitted to the Sub Registrar, yelahanka for registration. He however informed me that there appeared to be Stay Order granted by Lokayukta. To ascertain the correctness of the above facts, I personally visited the Sub registrar concerned who on enquiry disclosed me that there had been a general Stay order granted by you on 18th of January 2001. Hence this representation.
My Dear Brother, you are aware with what amount of difficulty we were able to persuade the then Chief Minister of Karnataka to hand over possession of the land to the Office bearers of the above society with the special efforts of Mr. Justice Mohan, the then Chief Justice. You are also aware that at that point of time none of us was able to pay entire value of the site in a lump sum. Hence there had been some delay in that behalf. However , may I now request you to grant exemption from your Stay Order so as to enable the Sub Registrar to register the Document of the site referred to above and oblige. This does not mean that I am coming in the way of your investigation of the Complaint registered, in accordance with law.
Copy to the Sub-Registrar, Bangalore.
for needful action.
On the front page it is hand written as follow:
Sri R. Devdas, Advocate s/o Hon’ble Justice ramkrishna presented this letter. G.P .. 7/3 .. ARE-2
…The copy of allotment letter annexed by Hon’ble Justice is in Kannada at pages 247 & 248..
[ Our Note: these four pages appear as page Nos. 246 to 249 of certified copies supplied to us on 19/11/12. ]
- 14.3. 2001:To-Register-Sites:MODIFIED INTERIM ORDER- Approved-Plan-Enclosed
- 05. Ltr-To-Society: Investigation dis-continued. 14/ Mar/2002. -.Upa-Lok.BCD-64/99-00.
- List of Typed Documents from files of “COMPT/UPLOK/BCD-64/99-2000 “
01.“Part-I.Pgs4:Of 90 Pages-LayOutPlan Copying” Compt/uplok/BCD/-64/99-2000/164
“Part-1.4pgs. of 90 pgs-LayOutPlan Copying” Compt/uplok/BCD/-64/99-2000/164
Part-I [4pages] of Two Parts 90 pgs: compt/uplok/BCD/-64/99-2000
Page: 00 of 94 pages ARE-2
Round Seal of Government of Karnataka
Office of Karnataka Lokayukta
Multi Storey Building, Doctor B.R. Ambedkar Road, Bangalore-1
No Dairy …..
Page No: 01
KARNATAKA STATE VIGILANCE COMMISSION
Pet. No. Compt/Uplok/BCD-64/99-2000 Date of Registration: 17.06.99
- Name of the Patitioner: Suo-motu Investigatinon. Date of Petitioin: ——
- Nature of Patition Place from which written … Bangalore
Signed / Pseudonymous/ Anonymous
- Name/s of the AGO/s. with designation:
 Shri Secretary,
KarnatakaState Judicial Dept. Employees Co.op
 Shri Directors,
KarnatakaState Judicial Dept. Employees Co.op Society, Bangalore
 The Chief Officer, Town Municipality, Yelahanka
- Petition addressed to ———-
- Copies of Petition sent to Hon’ble Upalokayukta
The allegations are as follows:-
Page No: 02
Para 1 :-Complaint file No.Compt/uplok/BLD.6-2000, there is a sketch map which is out 3’ x 3’. As per the oral instructions of Hon’ble ARE – 2, the same has to be got xeroxed and thren case has to be taken. The said map is placed in the file.
Para 2:- On enquiry it is ascertained that such a big map cannot be xeroxed in our office xerox machine. Therefore, it has to be xeroxed outside, where such a big xerox can be done.
Para – 3
Therefore, it is submitted that if approved a note will be put up to DRA for making arrangements.
-Signed- Date: 27.11.1999
Para – 04 ARE-2]
As per the instruction given by the Uplokayukta for needful action.
Para – 05 DRA: Sri. Laxmikant is directed to get the xerox copies and cashier is directed to make payment of required amount.
Page No. 03
Para No. 6 As per orders at Para 5 xerox copies of the Map is submitted for further orders [Signed 4.12.99].
Para No.7 DRA] zerox copies as directed are obtained and sent to ARE–2 for further needful action [Signed date in-visible]