Bangalore Development Authority vs M/S. Mittal Steel Limited
2023 Latest Caselaw 4554 Kant

                                             -1-
                                                   NC: 2023:KHC:24759-DB
                                                        WA No.902 of 2021




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                        DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
                                         PRESENT
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                             AND
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
                           WRIT APPEAL NO.902 OF 2021 (BDA)
               BETWEEN:

               1.   BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
                    TOWN PLANNER MEMBER
                    KUMARA PARK WEST
                    T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD
                    BANGALORE 560 020
Digitally           BY ITS JOINT DIRECTOR
signed by           TOWN PLANING SECTION.
RUPA V                                                       ...APPELLANT
Location:      (BY SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADV.,)
High Court
of Karnataka   AND:

               1.   M/S. MITTAL STEEL LIMITED
                    A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
                    COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS
                    REGISTERED OFFICE AT
                    WHITEFIELD ROAD, MAHADEVAPURA
                    BANGALORE 560 048
                    REP BY ITS DIRECTOR.

               2.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                    PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
                    URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
                    VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001.

               3.   KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
                    DEVELOPMENT BOARD
                    BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                    AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER
                    NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVANA
                            -2-
                                  NC: 2023:KHC:24759-DB
                                       WA No.902 of 2021




    EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR
    RACE COURSE ROAD
    BANGALORE 560 001.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. UDAYA HOLLA, SR. COUNSEL FOR
  SMT. BRIJITA PRAKASH, ADV., FOR R1
   SRI. B. RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R2
   SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADV., FOR R3)

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION 47310/2015 DATED
12.11.2020 AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORERS, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                      JUDGMENT

This intra Court appeal has been filed against an

order dated 12.11.2020 passed by the learned Single

Judge by which the writ petition preferred by the

respondent No.1 has been allowed.

2. The learned Single Judge, by an order dated

12.11.2020, has quashed the impugned notification

dated 03.03.2014 issued by the Bangalore Development

Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authority') and

the communication of the Additional Chief Secretary of

NC: 2023:KHC:24759-DB WA No.902 of 2021

Urban Development Department dated 12.07.2019 and

a writ of mandamus has been issued to the Authority to

permit respondent No.1 to utilize the schedule property

for the purpose specified in the Revised Master Plan,

2015 and Zoning Regulations 2007 without insisting a

no objection certificate from Karnataka Industrial Areas

Development Board or any other authority.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the

parties at length.

4. From perusal of the order dated 12.11.2020, it

is evident that the learned Single Judge has relied on a

judgment dated 06.08.2015 passed by the learned

Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.52905/2013 and

other connected petitions (M/s. Jaico Automobile

Engineering Vs. The State of Karnataka) and has

allowed the writ petition.

NC: 2023:KHC:24759-DB WA No.902 of 2021

5. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid order has

been accepted by the Authority which was a party to the

said writ petition and no appeal has been filed by the

Authority against the aforesaid judgment dated

06.08.2015. Therefore, this appeal, at the instance of

Authority, cannot be entertained. The contention that

Section 14A(3) of the Karnataka Town and Country

Planning Act, 1961 was deleted w.e.f. 10.09.2015 and

therefore, judgment dated 06.08.2015 passed by the

learned Single Judge of this Court in

W.P.No.52905/2013 and other connected petitions

(M/s. Jaico Automobile Engineering Vs. The State of

Karnataka) does not apply is concerned, suffice it to say

that the same has no bearing on the controversy

involved in this appeal as respondent No.1 had

submitted an application to the Town Planning Member,

Bangalore Development Authority for change of land use

from industrial to commercial on 13.02.2014 i.e. prior

to repeal of the aforesaid provision. Therefore, the

NC: 2023:KHC:24759-DB WA No.902 of 2021

notification dated 03.03.2014 of the respondent No.1 is

governed by the existing provision.

6. For the reasons assigned by the learned Single

Judge as well as taking into account the fact that the

Authority has not chosen to challenge the order dated

06.08.2015 passed in W.P.No.52905/2013 (M/s. Jaico

Automobile Engineering Vs. The State of Karnataka), we

are not inclined to entertain this appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby

dismissed.

Consequently, the pending interlocutory

application is also dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE RV