Point of Law: In terms of Section 4 of Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, 1999, it is required for any government authority to auction any property of government as well as to invite bids from general public in case of a tender.

ORDER :

1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs :

i. Issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned notice dated 22.02.2023 issued by the second respondent bearing No.Sa.Kam.Aa.(Da-Ma)/P.R/127/2022-23 marked as Annexure-D to the writ petition.

ii. Issue writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ order or directions to respondents to respondents to grant shops to the petitioners in the new shopping complex to be constructed in Gandhi Bazar under the Bengaluru Smart City Program.

iii. Direct the respondents to provide temporary alternate accommodation to the petitioners till completion the construction of the new shopping complex to be constructed in Gandhi Bazar under the Bengaluru Smart City Program.

iv. Grant such other relief as deemed fit under the facts and the circumstance of the case.

2. The petitioners claim to be small-time businessmen and women running shops in the Gandhi Bazar market set-up by respondent No.1-Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). The petitioners claim to be running businesses in the said market for several decades and have been making payment of due license fee to BBMP on a regular basis.

3. By way of notice dated 22.02.2023, the BBMP had asked the petitioners to vacate the premises on the ground that the existing market building being in a dilapidated condition, was required to be demolished and re-built under the Bengaluru Smart City Program.

4. The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the said demand caused for vacating the premises. Shri R.C. Nagaraja, Learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that

4.1. Firstly, on the ground that the petitioners, have been occupying the premises for several decades, would now be displaced, and as such, they would lose their source of income.

4.2. Secondly, it is contended that there is no alternate space which has been made available to the petitioners to carry on their business during the time when the building is proposed to be constructed.

4.3. Thirdly, it is contended that once the building is constructed, similar or identical premises as that in the occupation of the petitioners will have to be allotted to the petitioners at market rate. In this regard, reliance is placed on a letter said to have been addressed by an officer of the BBMP as regards as the Jayanagara shopping complex, whereunder, a promise was made by the 2nd respondent that suitable space would be allotted after the building is constructed. On all the aforesaid grounds, the aforesaid relief is sought for.

5. Sri. N.R. Jagadeeshwara, learned counsel appearing for the BBMP, submits that

5.1. Insofar as the Jayanagara shopping complex is concerned, that the letter as claimed by the petitioners to have been issued was without authorization. The person who had issued the said letter has been placed under suspension, and there is an enquiry being conducted by the Hon'ble Lokayukta. With the said letter not being acted upon, the petitioners also cannot seek allotment of shop space on construction without going to a procedural auction.

5.2. As regards the alternate accommodation, he submits that a temporary alternate accommodation has been made for the petitioners to use until the building is complete. Once the building is complete, the petitioners can participate in the auction, and if successful, the newly constructed shop would be allotted to the successful petitioner. If they are not successful, they would also have to vacate the temporary structure which has been set up. His submission is that until the new building is constructed and the auction is completed, the petitioners will not be disturbed and will be permitted to carry out their business in the temporary alternate accommodation. Their possessions and their business will not be disturbed, subject to the arrears of the licence fee being paid and the license fee on a monthly basis being paid as regards the temporary accommodation. Which license fee he submits would not be more tha