1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF JULY, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

WRIT PETITION NO.42920 OF 2018 (GM - RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. B.V.LAKSHMI,

W/O L.NARASIMHAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,

R/O NO.193, 27 CROSS,

2^ND MAIN ROAD,

JAYANAGARA 6^TH BLOCK,

BANGALORE – 560 082. ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI.GOPALAKRISHNA KURANDWAD, ADVOCATE)

AND :

1.

BANGALORE METROPOLITAN

TRANSPORT CORPORATION,

REPRESENTED BY IT’S

MANAGING DIRECTOR,

HAVING ITS REGISTERED

OFFICE AT NO.85, K.H.ROAD,

NGO COLONY, SUDHAMA NAGAR,

BANGALORE – 560 027.

2.

CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER,

BANGALORE METROPOLITAN

TRANSPORT CORPORATION,

CENTRAL OFFICE, NO.85,

K.H.ROAD, NGO COLONY,

SUDHAMA NAGAR,

BANGALORE – 560 027. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)

2

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO

QUASH LETTER DATED 26.09.2006 MARKED AS ANNEXURE –

D AND ETC.

- - -

THIS

PETITION

COMING

ON

FOR

PRELIMINARY

HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent

of both the parties, the same is heard finally.

2.

In this petition, petitioner inter alia seeks

quashment of communication dated 26.09.2006 issued

by Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation and

also letter dated 04.10.2007 issued by the second

respondent.

3.

The facts giving rise to the filing of the writ

petition

is

that

on

18.5.2005,

the

Bangalore

Metropolitan Transport Corporation through second

respondent unveiled a scheme expressing intention to

induct 410 private buses into its transportation service

3

to

supplement

its

services.

The

petitioner

by

communication dated 29.06.2005 offered to supply 10

buses and deposited Rs.1,00,000/- as earned money

deposit. Petitioner’s husband has also made a similar

application to the respondents and deposited a sum of

Rs.1,00,000/-. Thereupon, the letter of intent was

issued

to

the

petitioner

on

19.01.2006.

On

4/12-07-2006, second respondent issued final notice to

the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to give

explanation for not adhering to the terms of letter of

intent within a period of 7 days from the date of receipt

of the notice. On 12.07.2006, the petitioner has

submitted his reply to the aforesaid notice, in which

request was made to transfer the letter of intent in

favour of one Mr.Guruswamy, Managing Director of PPS

Tours and travels India (Pvt.) Ltd., Egmore, Chennai.

Thereupon, by an order dated 26.09.2006, second

respondent transferred the letter of intent in favour of

aforesaid Mr.Guruswamy and forfeited the earned

money deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited by the

4

petitioner. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has

approached this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised

similar contention that impugned order has been passed

in violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as

without issuing any notice nor affording an opportunity

of hearing to the petitioner.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the

respondents did not dispute the fact that the impugned

order dated 26.09.2006 has been passed without

affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

6.

In view of the fact that the impugned order

dated 26.09.2006 has been passed without affording

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the same is

hereby quashed and set aside and also the letter dated

04.10.2017 issued by the second respondent vide

Annexure-‘H’ is also hereby quashed. Respondent No.2

is directed to afford opportunity of hearing to the

5

petitioner and to decide the issue of refund of the

earnest money deposit by a speaking order within a

period of one month f