(1.) THE Bangalore Development Authority (for short 'the BDA') had allotted a site bearing No.92,6th Main, 4th Block, 2nd Phase, 3rd Stage of Banashankari Layout, Bangalore, measuring 6 x 9 meters to the petitioner as per letter of allotment at Annexure-A, dated 7/2/2004. THE BDA had also issued no objection certificate to the petitioner as per Annexure-B to enable him to raise loan to meet the cost of the site. He has deposited the entire sital value with the BDA. He made a representation as per Annexure-D, dated 7.3.2005 requesting the 1st respondent to execute a lease-cum-sale deed in respect of the site in question. THE BDA issued an endorsement at Annexure-E, dated 2.3.2005 informing him that the lease-cum-sale deed cannot be executed on account of pending litigation in respect of the site. THE petitioner made a representation at Annexure-F, dated 3.8.2007 requesting the Commissioner of the BDA to allot an alternative site of the same dimension in any of the layouts of the BDA in lieu of the site allotted to him as per the letter of allotment at Annexure-A. In response to the said representation, the BDA has issued an endorsement as per Annexure-G, dated 15.10 2007 informing him that it is yet to receive opinion from the concerned Engineer. THEreafter, the BDA has issued an endorsement as per Annexure-J, dated 11/8/2009 assuring him to allot an alternative site. Despite the said endorsement, the BDA has not allotted an alternative site. THErefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allot an alternative site in lieu of the site allotted to him as per Annexure-A, dated 7/2/2004.
(2.) THE respondents have filed their statement of objections. Learned Counsel for the respondents would contend that certain litigations are pending in respect of the site in question between the BDA and third parties. THErefore, the BDA is not in a position to execute a lease-cam-sale deed in furtherance of the letter of allotment, Annexure-A.