Karnataka High Court
The Housing Board Commissioner vs Sri Subhash Chandra on 12 March, 2025
-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)
IN WA No. 659/2022
BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER
KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD
CAUVERY BHAVAN,
K.G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed by
MAYAGAIAH (BY SRI. ACHAPPA P.B, ADVOCATE)
VINUTHA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
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
-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
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. DYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. H.L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
-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, 15 TH 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
38 SRI. SHIVANNA G.K
AGED MAJOR
R/O NO.1080, 8TH CROSS ROAD
ADARSHA LAYOUT
BASAVESHWARANAGAR
BANGALORE -560 054
39. 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.
- 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, 20 TH 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
...APPELLANT
(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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
