Writ Petition No. 8650 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 8650 OF 2025 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. KEMPAIAH S/O LATE NARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. SRI. GALAPPA S/O LATE NARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
Legal Reasoning
this Court in the aforesaid order within an outer limit of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. The respondent-BDA shall consider the application of the petitioners individually and on petitioners - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 complying/satisfying requirement as provided under law and as observed by Division Bench in the aforesaid order and pass appropriate orders within the period as contemplated thereunder. 6. In the meanwhile, respondent-BDA shall not take any precipitative action against the petitioners until determination of the representation as directed above. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv CT: BHK
Arguments
3. SRI. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE NARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 4. SRI. T.T. SRINIVASA S/O THIMAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 5. SMT. DHANALAKSHMI H.G. W/O GANGANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 106, KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE, KODIGEHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATHI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 091. - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 6. SRI. SHASHIDHAR REDDY K, S/O SUDHAKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO. 93, KANALLI VILLAGE, KODIGEHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 091. 7. SRI. S. JEEVA, S/O SAPATHIK, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO. 13, 6TH CROSS, MUDDAPPA GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 021. 8. SMT. KAMAKSHI, W/O T.T. SRINIVASA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE, KODIGEHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATHI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 091. (BY SRI. L. VENKATARAMA REDDY, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONERS AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 KUMARA PARK WEST, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,, KUMARA PARK WEST, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SESHU V, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. CALL FOR RECORDS FROM RESPONDENTS. B. DIRECTION, WRIT OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF PROHIBITION RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENTS OR ANY PERSONS CLAIMING THROUGH THEM FROM DISPOSSESSING OR DEMOLISHING THE HOUSES CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONERS OVER THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owners of the individual sites in a private layout known as 'Mahalakshmi Layout' formed by petitioner Nos.1 to 3, in the year 1999. It is submitted that in terms of the directions issued by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1783/2014 and other connected matters, the petitioners are entitled for allotment of alternative sites. The attention of this Court is drawn to similar such writ petitions, including W.P.No.30147/2024 dated 21.01.2025, wherein the directions issued by the Division Bench have been culled out as follows: ''b) Insofar as the site owners who have not made an application as contemplated in para (iii)(a) hereinabove: i) They shall register themselves for allotment under the BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 within three months from today by paying the registration fee. However, payment of initial deposit by them is exempted. The necessary documents along with the said applications are - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 also to be filed to enable the BDA to verify the same; ii) The BDA shall treat the applicants as being entitled for priority allotment and allot each of them a site measuring 30x40 feet in the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout at the prevailing allotment prices subject to the applicants satisfying the dual requirements of allotment under the Rules that they must be the residents of Bengaluru (for 10 years) and should not be owning any residential property Bengaluru; iii) In case the applicants/writ petitioners do not fulfill the requirements for allotment under the Rules, 1984 they may be considered for allotment of 20x30 feet sites as per the Bangalore Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989; c) Insofar as the owners of residential sites who form part of a layout and who have sought for dropping their lands from acquisition in accordance with para (iii)(a) hereinabove, the BDA shall consider the same having regard to the observations made at para 66 hereinabove. If the BDA rejects their applications, the site owners who have first filed applications pursuant to para (iii)(a) hereinabove, shall be entitled to a further period of one month after - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15452 WP No. 8650 of 2025 the decision as contemplated therein is intimated to opt to and apply in the manner as contemplated in para (iii)(b) hereinabove.'' 2. However, learned counsel Sri.K.Krishna, appearing for the respondent-BDA submits that petitioner Nos.1 to 3 claim to be the owners of the larger extent of land and they have formed the sites and sold the same in favour of several persons and therefore, they will not be entitled for the allotment of alternative sites. 3. Having regard to the directions issued by the Division Bench, if the petitioners are entitled for allotment of alternative sites, the authorities shall consider the claim of the petitioners. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioners to file necessary application, seek remedy as provided and reserved by the Division Bench of