Writ Appeal No. 659 of 2022 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 659 OF 2022 (LB-RES) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO. 474 OF 2022 (LB-RES) WRIT APPEAL NO. 660 OF 2022 (LB-RES) WRIT APPEAL NO. 661 OF 2022 (LB-RES) WRIT APPEAL NO. 662 OF 2022 (LB-RES) WRIT APPEAL NO. 684 OF 2022 (LB-RES) Digitally signed by MAYAGAIAH VINUTHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN WA No. 659/2022 BETWEEN: THE COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD CAUVERY BHAVAN, K.G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. (BY SRI. ACHAPPA P.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SUNDARA S/O SRI SIDDHAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.113, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, MADESHWARA LAYOUT METAGALLI POST, MYSURU-570 014. 2. SMT. MAMATHA C/O SRI. RAMESH …APPELLANT - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.152, 1ST MAIN KRISHNANANDANAGAR NANDINI LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 096. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY & COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKASA SOUDHA M.S BUILDING DR B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2, SRI. C.H.DEVARAJ, HCGP FOR R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED, IN WP NO.8553/2022 (LB-RES) DATED 22/04/2022 AND ALLOW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 OR ANY OTHER PERSON SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ENFORCE A RIGHT UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW WHICH HAS BEEN QUASHED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AS THE PROVISION OF LAW, QUASHED WOULD OPERATE IN RETROSPECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION OF THE PROVISION. IN WA NO. 474/2022 BETWEEN: THE HOUSING COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE -560 009 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. DYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. H.L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE) ...APPELLANT - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS AND: 1. SRI. P.S KUSHALAPPA S/O SUBBARAYALU AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O NO.8, 7TH CROSS AGARAHARADASARALLI, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE -560 079 2. SRI. R. SRINIVAS S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O BASAVANNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD SATHYA SAI LAYOUT MAHADEVAPURA POST HOODI VILLAGE, WHITE FIELD BANGALORE -560 038 3. SMT. S. BHARATHI D/O SHAMAYYA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O NO.57, 16TH CROSS 6TH MAIN ROAD, J.P NAGAR BANGALORE -560 078 4. SRI. S. RAMESH KUMAR S/O SANTHOSH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O NO.226, I MAIN ROAD KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE -560 079 5. SRI. KODANDARAMA S/O LAKSHMIPATHI AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O NO.261, 'LAKSHMI KRUPA' MAHADESHWARANAGAR VISHWANIDAM POST, MAGADI POST BANGALORE -560 099 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 6. SMT. AMARAVATHI W/O N.A SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O NO.173, BOREWELL ROAD WHITE FIELD, MAHADEVAPURA POST BANGALORE -560 048 7. SRI. M. MUNIYAPPA S/O DODDAMUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O NO.76, MARUTHI LAYOUT BASAVANNA NAGAR, MAHADEVAPURA POST HUDI VILLAGE, WHITE FIELD BANGALORE -560 038 8. SRI. Y. RAJENDRA PRASAD S/O RATHNAMAYI (LATE) AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O NO.06, OPP GANAPATHI TEMPLE I MAIN ROAD, KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE-560 079 9. SMT. SOUJANYA W/O M. LOKESH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O NO.173, BORE WELL ROAD WHITE FILED BANGALORE -560 066. 10. SRI. KAMALAKAR REDDY S/O KAPPI REDDY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O NO.1396, 9TH CROSS III STAGE, 4TH BLOCK BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE -560 079 11. SRI. B. RAGHU S/O BEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O NO.223, I G CROSS III STAGE, 4TH BLOCK, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE -560 079 12. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O MAHAEV AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O NO.174/A, I MAIN ROAD III STAGE, 4TH BLOCK, KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE-560 079 13. SMT. ASHA D/O THIMMAIAH W/O MAHESH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O NO.3632, I CROSS II MAIN ROAD GAYATHRI NAGAR BANGALORE-560 021 14. SMT. KOMALA D/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/ONO.212, 15TH CROSS II STAGE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE -560 086 15. SRI. K.N JAYARAM S/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O NO.235, I MAIN ROAD CHANNAMMAKERE TANK BED BANASHANKARI BANGALORE-560 050 16. SRI. SHIVANNA S/O JAVAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O NO.174/A, I MAIN ROAD KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE-560 079 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 17. SMT. M. MANJULA W/O VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O THINDLU VILLAGE VIDYARANYAPURA BANGALORE -560 064 18. SRI. C. GANESHAN S/O M. CHALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O NO.840, III 'B' CROSS II STAGE, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BANGALORE-560 064 19. SRI S R CHALUVARAJU S/O N K RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O ALLALASANDRA GKVK POST YELAHANKA BANGALORE -560 064 20. SRI. M.V UMESHA S/O VENKATA SHIVAS REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O NO.2, MARUTHINILAYA NAGASHETTIHALLY SHANKARANAGAR POST BANGALORE-560 096. 21. SRI. N. SATHISH S/O S.K.N GUPTA (LATE) AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O NO.06, SAMPIGE MAIN ROAD MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE -560 063 22. SRI. K. RAJA REDDY S/O KEMPARAJU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O NO.152, 2ND CROSS, KAMAKSHIPALYA BANGALORE -560 079 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 23. SRI. N.P PARAMESH S/O N.R PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O NO.14, 19TH CROSS FLOOR MILL ROAD, 3RD STAGE KHB COLONY, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BANGALORE -560 064 24. SMT. RADHA PRAHALAD W/O DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O NO.150, 2ND STAGE GRUHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE -560 079 25. SMT. SUNANDHAMMA W/O H. RAVI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O NO.36, III CROSS, II STAGE GRUHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, KAMALANAGAR BANGALORE -560 079 26. SRI. M.B PAPANNA S/O PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O KUVEMPUNAGAR CHENNAPATTANA-562 160. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 27. SRI. SRIDHAR S/O SUDHEENDRA RAO AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O NO.1432, 2ND CROSS HAL MAIN ROAD BANGALORE -560 036 28. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY & COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKAS SOUDHA, M.S BUILDING - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS DR B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE -560 001 29. SMT. R. PRIYANKA W/O R ASHWINKUMAR AGED MAJOR R/O NO.100, IAF-6, BROOKS MANSION, SPENCORS ROAD FRAZER TOWN BANGALORE -560 005 30. SRI. SATHISH M S/O MUNIRAJAPPA (LATE) AGED MAJOR R/O NO.BHOOPASANDRA OPP SUN RISE SCHOOL, NTI LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 097 31. SRI. K. SIDDAPPA S/O MALLAIAH AGED MAJOR R/O NO.A-12, 5TH MAIN ROAD BEHIND AKASHAVANI YADAGIRI, MYSURU -570 020 32. SRI RAVINDRA H.P AGED MAJOR R/O NO.41, 'SAMBHRAM' BEML LAYOUT, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD PHASE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR BANGALORE -560 098 33. SRI. PARASHIVAMURTHY B.S AGED MAJOR R/O NO.2100 NEAR SIDDAGANGA KRUPA KNS MILL, WESTERN LAYOUT, TUMKUR TOWN TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 102. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 34. SRI. VENKATACHALAPATHY SHETTY K.V S/O KRISHNAIAH SHETTY AGED MAJOR R/O ANEKAL TOWN, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-562 100. 35. SRI. MOHAN GOWDA S/O RAMANA GOWDA AGED MAJOR R/O, C/O SACHIN D PATIL SAHISIDDA ENCLAVE APARTMENT NO.202, 2ND FLOOR, NEAR RAJALAKSHMI NURSING HOME J.P NAGAR, 1ST PHASE BANGALORE-560 078 36. SMT. SHOBHA GURUSIDDAPPA AGED MAJOR R/O NO.108, 3RD CROSS ROAD 3RD MAIN ROAD, SUNDARNAGAR GOKUL BANGALORE -560 054 37. SMT. SAVITHA Y PATIL W/O Y R PATIL, RETD IGP AGED MAJOR R/O FLAT NO.6/A ,I CROSS ROAD BEHIND BASAVA COLONY ROAD BELGAUM TOWN BELGAUM DISTRICT SRI. SHIVANNA G.K AGED MAJOR R/O NO.1080, 8TH CROSS ROAD ADARSHA LAYOUT BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE -560 054 SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, S/O S RAMESH, AGED MAJOR, R/O NO.25, NEAR BALANJEYA TEMPLE, OPP RAMAIAH HOSPITAL, RMV II STAGE, BANGALORE-560 054. 38 39. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 40. SMT. DIVYASHRE S W/O VENKATESH NAIDU N AGED MAJOR R/O NO.790, 20TH CROSS ROAD 18TH MAIN ROAD, BANASHANKARI II STAGE BANGALORE -560 085 41. SMT. N. VIDYA AGED MAJOR R/O NO.210, 2ND FLOOR 4TH CROSS ROAD, K.S GARDEN LALBAGH ROAD BANGALORE -560 027 42. DR MANESH GIRI S/O DR. SHIVA KUMAR AGED MAJOR R/O NO.482, 4TH MAIN ROAD MARUTHI TEMPLE, DOUBLE ROAD KUVEMPUNAGAR, MYSORE-570 009 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R27 & R30, SRI. R.S. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1, SRI. C.H. DEVARAJ, HCGP FOR R28, R29, R31, R32, R33, R34, R37, R42-SERVED & UNREPRESENTED VIDE ORDER DATED 05.03.2024, NOTICE TO R35 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO i)SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED, IN WP NO.18432/2013 (LB-RES) DATED 03/03/2022 AND ALSO THE ORDER OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION DATED 20/04/2022 AND ALLOW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 27 AND RESPONDENT NOS.29-42 OR ANY OTHER PERSON SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ENFORCE A RIGHT UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW WHICH HAS BEEN QUASHED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AS THE - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS PROVISION OF LAW, QUASHED WOULD OPERATE IN RETROSPECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION OF THE PROVISION, UNLESS QUASHED PROSPECTIVELY. IN WA NO. 660/2022 BETWEEN: THE HOUSING BOARD COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, BENGALURU-560 009. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. ACHAPPA P.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SUBHASH CHANDRAN S/O MARIYAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.910, S.S NAGAR, NEAR BANNIMANTAPA, NEAR BY SATYA SHOP, OPPOSITE TO HOODA SCHOOL, MYSORE-570 015. 2. S. RAGHAVENDRA S/O SOMSKEAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT NO.311, KALIKOPPALUBIDI, PALAHALLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 438. 3. KENDAGANNA S/O SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, DODDAMARAGOWDANAHALLI (P) MYSORE-570 032. 4. Y. MALE GOWDA S/O LATE CHIKKAHIDHE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS RESIDING AT NO.113, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, MAHADESHWARA LAYOUT, MYSORE-570 016. 5. RAGHAVENDRA S/O RAMANNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.234, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, SIDDHIVINAYAKA BLOCK, TEACHERS LAYOUT, BEHIND RAJKUMAR ROAD, MYSORE-570 029. 6. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5 SRI. C.H. DEVARAJ, HCGP FOR R6) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED, IN WP NO.8174/2022 (LB-RES) DATED 22/04/2022 AND ALLOW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 5 OR ANY OTHER PERSON SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ENFORCE A RIGHT UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW, QUASHED WOULD OPERATE IN RETROSPECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION OF THE PROVISION. IN WA NO. 661/2022 BETWEEN: THE COMMISSIONER, KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD KAVERI BHAVAN, - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS K.G ROAD BANGALORE-560 009. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. ACHAPPA P.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. B. RAGHU S/O SRI. BEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.234, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS ROAD TEACHERS LAYOUT BEHIND RAJKUMAR ROAD MYSURU-29 2. SMT. SUMALATHA W/O SRI. SUBASHCHANDRA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.113, 1ST MAIN ROAD MAHADESHWARA LAYOUT METAGALLI POST, MYSURU-16 3. SRI. RAJASHEKARA S/O LATE SRI. KULLACHARI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.13, 1ST CROSS 1ST MAIN, SAIJYOTHINIVASA PUTTENAHALLI, J.P NAGAR BENGALURU-560 078 4. SRI. ASHISH KUMAR S/O SRI. KUNNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.223, 1ST G CROSS 3RD STAGE, 4TH BLOCK BASAVESHWARANAGAR BENGALURU-560 079 5. SRI. BEERESH S/O SRI. BASAPPA - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS RESIDING AT KYATHANAHALLI GRAMA HAMPAPURA HOBLI, H.D KOTE TQ, MYSORE DISTRICT 6. SMT. KAMALAMMA W/O SRI PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.225, 1ST MAIN ROAD GANGADESHWARA SCHOOL ROAD KASTURI LAYOUT, KAMALANAGARA BENGALURU-560 079 7. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6, SRI. C.H. DEVARAJ, HCGP FOR R7) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED, IN WP NO.2829/2022 (LB-RES) DATED 21/04/2022 AND ALLOW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 6 OR ANY OTHER PERSON SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ENFORCE A RIGHT UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW WHICH HAS BEEN QUASHED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AS THE PROVISION OF LAW, QUASHED WOULD OPERATE IN RETROSPECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION OF THE PROVISION. IN WA NO. 662/2022 BETWEEN: THE HOUSING COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS CAUVERY BHAVAN BANGALORE-560 009. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. ACHAPPA P.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA W/O SRI. CHENNAREDDY AGED ABOUT 62 YEAWRS RESIDING AT NO. 23/1 4TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, JAI BHEEMANAGARA BTM LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 068 2. SMT. DEVIKA W/O LATE SRI. NARAYANA SINGH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 43, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS JAMBUSAVARIDINNE 8TH BLOCK, J.P NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 3. SMT. REKHA W/O SRI. AVINASHA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT KYATANAHALLI GRAMA HAMPAPURA HOBLI, H.D KOTE TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 114 4. SRI. BASAVARAJA S/O SRI. KEMPARAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT SINDENAHALLI GRAMA HALANAHALLI POST, HAMPAPURA HOBLI HD KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 114. - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 5. SRI CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE SRI. RAMANNA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.205 LIG 3 9TH BLOCK, SURYANAGAR 1ST PHASE, CHANDAPURA CIRCLE ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALORE-560 099 6. SRI. MAHADEVA S/O SRI. RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.120, NANJAMBA AGRAHARA 12TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD CHAMARAJAPETE, BENGALORE-560 018. 7. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY & COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKAS SOUDHA, M.S. BUILDING DR B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALORE-560 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6 SRI. C.H. DEVARAJ, HCGP FOR R7) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED, IN WP NO.6112/2022 (LB-RES) DATED 21/04/2022 AND ALLOW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 5 OR ANY OTHER PERSON SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ENFORCE A RIGHT UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW WHICH HAS BEEN QUASHED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AS THE PROVISION OF LAW, QUASHED WOULD OPERATE IN RETROSPECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION OF THE PROVISION. - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS IN WA NO. 684/2022 BETWEEN: THE COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD CAVUERY BHAVAN, K.G ROAD BANGALORE-560 009 (BY SRI. ACHAPPA P.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. M.J SUMANTH S/O SRI. JAI KUMAR AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.124 PREETHISWAMY NILAYA 6TH CROSS, VV NAGAR MADDUR TOWN, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 401 ...APPELLANT 2. SRI. K.N SURESH S/O LATE SRI. NARAYANEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT MALLESHWARA POPULAR LAYOUT IJJOR, BEHIND NETAJI POPULAR HIGH SCHOL WARD NO.30, RAMANAGAR RAMANAGAR DISTRICT-571 511. 3. SRI. NANDAN R S/O SRI. T. RAJU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 459/75 ULLALU VILLAGE, NEAR VAJRESHWARI TALKIES, ULLALA, BANGALORE-560110 4. SRI. KUMAR S/O LATE SRI SANNAJOGAYYA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS RESIDING AT NO.113 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS MAHADESWARA LAYOUT MATEGALALI POST MYSURU-570 016 5. SMT. M.J SUSHMA W/O LOKESH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.34, 4TH CROSS NGF LAYOUT, NRUPATHUNGANAGAR NAGARBHAVI, BANGALORE-560 079 6. SRI. V. PURUSHOTTAM S/O VENKATEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.20/1, 3RD CROSS BEHIND RAJARAJESHWARI TALKIES MALLATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560 079. 7. SRI. PRASANNA HEGDE S/O SRI. RAVIRAJ HEGDE AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8, GROUND FLOOR BALAJI NILAYA, 9TH MAIN BHAIRAVESHWARA NAGAR NAGARBHAVI-560 079 8. SRI. ERANNA S/O LATE SRI. BASAVE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESIDING AT SINDENALLLI GRAMA HALANAHALLI POST, HAMPAPURA POST HAMAPAPURA HOBLI, H D KOTE TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT 570 028. 9. SRI. J. PRAKASH S/O SRI. JAYKUMAR AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.225, 1ST MAIN ROAD GANGADHARESHWARA SCHOOL ROAD KAMALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 079. - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 10. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O SRI. SHISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.234 2ND FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, SIDDHIVINAYAKA BLOCK TEACHERS LAYOUT BEHIND DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD MYSURU-570 029. 11. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY & COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING VIKASA SOUDHA, M.S BUILDING DR. B.R AMBEDAKR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R10, SRI. C.H. DEVARAJ, HCGP FOR R11) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED, IN WP NO.8571/2022 (LB-RES) DATED 22/04/2022 AND ALLOW THE CAPTIONED APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY HOLD THAT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 10 OR ANY OTHER PERSON SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ENFORCE A RIGHT UNDER A PROVISION OF LAW WHICH HAS BEEN QUASHED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AS THE PROVISION OF LAW, QUASHED WOULD OPERATE IN RETROSPECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION OF THE PROVISION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 20 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Writ Appeal No.474/2022 is filed as against the impugned order dated 03.03.2022 passed in W.P.No.18432/2013 (LB- RES). The learned Single Judge had considered the writ petition which was filed seeking quashing of Annexure-F communication dated 04.08.2012 as illegal and contrary to law as also seeking directions to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for allotment of sites in Suryanagar II Stage Layout, Bengaluru. 2. This Court while admitting the writ petitions had passed an interim order on 22.04.2013 directing status-quo relating to the allotments existing as on the said date to be maintained for a period of two months. The order was passed in respect of the sites as indicated in the schedule attached to the petition. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the interim order was with regard to allotment of the said sites. The interim order had been subsequently extended from time to time as well. Thereafter, a letter dated 02.03.2022 was placed on record by the learned Senior panel counsel appearing for the appellant, agreeing that - 21 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS the allotments of houses/sites under discretionary quota could be made available to the writ petitioners as well, in case the Court directs. The said communication had been taken note of
Decision
by the learned Single Judge and the writ petition was disposed of recording the said communication and the assurance made by the appellant that allotments would be made in terms of the said communication. 3. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that while the writ petitions were pending before this Court, another writ petition had been filed with a prayer to declare certain portions of the Karnataka Housing Board (Allotment) Regulations 1983 as amended by the Karnataka Housing Board (Allotment) (Amendment) Regulations, 2017 as unconstitutional and being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The said writ petition, which was filed as a 'Public Interest Litigation' as W.P.No.8340/2018 (GM-RES- PIL), was disposed of on 18.10.2019 by a Division Bench of this Court holding that categories 'A' and 'C' in the table in Regulation 4 and category 'C' in the table in Regulation 9A as - 22 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS well explanation (a) to both Regulations are struck down being unconstitutional. 4. It is submitted that it was on the finding that there was unguided discretion provided in the impugned Regulations that the Division Bench had held that those Regulations are liable to be struck down. It is submitted that an interlocutory application for clarification had been moved before the learned Single Judge, which was disposed of by order dated 20.04.2022 clarifying that the setting aside of the offending Regulation would take effect from the date of such order unless it was on the ground of legislative competence. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the specific provisions which granted power to the Board to allot houses/sites under the discretionary quota having been found bad in law and struck down by this Court in the Public Interest Litigation, the further direction for allotment of sites to the writ petitioners under the discretionary quota could not have been made by the Board. It is, therefore, prayed that even though the judgment records a concession having been made by the Board by its communication dated - 23 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 02.03.2022, the Board would be unable to make allotments as provided in the communication and that the Board should not have been held to its concession to make such allotments in the light of the striking down of the Regulations by the Division Bench of this Court. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, submit that they were persons, who made applications for allotment of sites under the discretionary quota well in advance and there were recommendations to allot the sites to them as well. It is submitted that they had challenged Annexure-F, by which allotments were made under the discretionary quota to other persons disregarding their claims for allotment and the said allotments had also been partially given effect to. It is contended that since the judgment was not one rendered on merits, but was on the basis of an agreement between the parties, the same would be uneffected by the earlier judgment striking down some of the amended provisions in 2019. It is further contended that since Annexure-F had already been given effect to atleast partially, the petitioners, who were entitled for allotments as on the date of Annexure-F - 24 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS are also liable to be allotted houses/sites in accordance with the Regulations, as they then stood. 7. Having considered the contentions advanced, we notice that the letter which is relied on in the judgment under appeal is one dated 02.03.2022. As on the date of the said letter, on which reliance is being placed by the writ petitioners, the discretionary quota as was provided under the 2017 Amendment to the Regulations already stood set aside by this Court as being unconstitutional. 8. In the above circumstances, we are the opinion that the contention of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners that setting aside of the offending provisions are to be read as prospective and would be applicable only to the applications made after the date of the judgment by this Court cannot be accepted. It is admitted that no allotments had been made in respect of the scheduled sites as on the date when the learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition on the concession by the Housing Board. We are of the opinion that in the light of the striking down of the discretionary quota by this Court by judgment dated 18.10.2019 as being unconstitutional, - 25 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS no allotment under the discretionary quota which falls under the offending Regulations could have been made after the said date i.e., after 18.10.2019. 9. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the concession made by communication dated 02.03.2022 and the direction to allot sites on the basis of the discretionary quota which already stands struck down cannot be sustained. 10. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The concession recorded that the allotments will be made under discretionary quota to the writ petitioners as also the order of clarification issued in I.A.No.2/2022 and I.A.No.3/2021 dated 20.04.2022 shall stand set aside. It is made clear that the appellant could not have made allotment in the discretionary quota after 18.10.2019. In case any of the writ petitioners have a right for allotment of houses/sites under the extant Regulations apart from their claim under the discretionary quota which stands struck down, such application shall be considered in accordance with law. - 26 - NC: 2025:KHC:10531-DB WA No. 659 of 2022 C/W WA No. 474 of 2022 WA No. 660 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS In view of disposal of Writ Appeal No.474/2022, Writ Appeals No.659, 660, 661, 662 and 684 of 2022 are also stand allowed in the same terms. All pending IA's stand disposed of. SD/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8