Karnataka High Court
The Bangalore Development Authority vs State Of Karnataka on 20 August, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:32405-DB
WA No. 1178 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1178 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
BETWEEN:
1. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
KUMARA PARK WEST EXTENSION,
BANGALORE-560 020,
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
2. THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
KUMARA PARK WEST EXTENSION,
BANGALORE-560 020.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI GURUDAS SHYAM RAO KANNUR, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
Digitally SRI AJAY KUMAR M, ADVOCATE)
signed by
NANDINI R
Location: AND:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560 001,
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. SRI K. S. BASAVARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
S/O. SRI SHIVASHANKARAIAH,
R/AT NO.109/6, VEERABHADRANAGAR,
KOMMAGHATTA, SULIKERE POST,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:32405-DB
WA No. 1178 of 2025
HC-KAR
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
3. SMT. KATHYANINIYAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
W/O. SRI SHIVASHANKARAIAH,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
4. SRI SHIVASHANKARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
S/O. LATE BYRAPPA,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
5. SRI D. SOMASHEKARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS,
S/O. LATE BYRAPPA,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
6. SRI MALLIKARJUNA ARADHYA,
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
S/O. LATE NANJUNDARADHYA,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
7. SRI K.R. DAYANANDA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
S/O. LATE RAJASHEKARAIAH,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:32405-DB
WA No. 1178 of 2025
HC-KAR
8. SRI JAYANNA. R,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
S/O. LATE. K.G. REVANNA,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
9. SRI JAGADISH. R,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
S/O. LATE. K.G. REVANNA,
R/AT KOMMAGHATTA,
SULIKERE POST,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560 060.
10. SRI K.M. BASAVARARADHYA,
AGED ABOUT 91 YEARS,
S/O. LATE. R.N. MALLIKARJUNAIAH,
R/AT 68, 4TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
CHAMARAJPET,
BANGALORE-560 018.
11. S.V. SIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
S/O. SRI R. VIRUPAKSHAIAH,
R/AT NO.18, REVANASIDDESHWARA NILAYA,
KRISHNAPPA GARDEN,
KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN,
BANGALORE-560 060.
NOTE: THE RESPONDENTS NO.11 & 12 IN THE
W.P NOS. 26657/2016 AND WP NO. 26659/2016 AS
BEEN DISMISSED VIDE ORDERS DATED 29.08.2017
& 13.10.2017. HENCE THE ABOVE RESPONDENTS ARE
NOT MADE PARTY TO THIS WRIT APPEAL.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K.S HARISH, G.A FOR R-1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS b) ALLOW
THE ABOVE WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:32405-DB
WA No. 1178 of 2025
HC-KAR
DATED 09.01.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN
WP Nos-26640-650/2016 AND 26651/2016 AND 26652-626/2016.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The appellants have filed the present appeal, impugning an
order dated 09.01.2019, passed by the learned Single Judge in
Writ Petition Nos. 26640-650/2016 [LA-BDA] and other connected
writ petitions.
2. The operative part of the impugned order reads as under:
"In the above circumstances, these Writ Petitions succeed; a
Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondents 2 & 3 to take
immediate steps for allotment of sites to the land losers; a Writ of
Mandamus issues to the 1st respondent-Government and to the
2nd respondent-BDA not to go for allotment of sites to the public
till after sufficient area/sites are earmarked in the layout for the
benefit of land losers.
The respondents 1 & 2 shall consider formulation of some
norms/guidelines for regulating the earmarking of the area/sites
for the benefit of the land losers in the BDA layouts.
No costs."
NC: 2025:KHC:32405-DB
HC-KAR
3. The present appeal has been filed after an inordinate delay
of 1610 days.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that
the appellants did not file an appeal as they are not aggrieved by
the directions to take steps for allotment of sites to land losers. He
submits that the appeal has been filed because the said impugned
order is being misconstrued, to mean that the appellants are
obliged to allot sites to even to those land losers who had opted to
collect cash compensation at the material time. He submits that
the impugned order is misconstrued to read that the appellants are
obliged to allot sites to all persons whose lands have been
acquired and therefore, the appellants would be aggrieved by such
an order.
5. Prima facie, the operative directions issued by the learned
Single Judge can be construed only as direction to the appellants
to allot sites to those persons who are otherwise eligible and
entitled for such allotment.
6. The learned counsel for appellants seeks to withdraw the
present appeal with liberty to file an application for clarification
NC: 2025:KHC:32405-DB
HC-KAR
before the learned Single Judge. The appeal is dismissed with the
aforesaid liberty.
7. All pending applications are also disposed of.
Sd/-
(VIBHU BAKHRU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(C M JOSHI)
JUDGE
tsn*
