VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2025 › High Court of Karnataka

Sri. Narayanappa v. Bangalore Development Authority

DISPOSED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
25 April 2025
Bench
Krishna S Dixit, M.Nagaprasanna
Case no.
WP 8157/2025

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow Krishna S DixitFollow M.Nagaprasanna

Judgment

NC:(2025:KHC:17203-DB( WP(No.(8157(of(2025( ( ( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( TH DATED(THIS(THE(25 (DAY(OF(APRIL,(2025(

PRESENT(

THE(HON'BLE(MR(JUSTICE(KRISHNA(S(DIXIT(

(AND((

(THE(HON'BLE(MR(JUSTICE(M.NAGAPRASANNA(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(8157(OF(2025((LA-BDA)(

BETWEEN:(( ( , SRI.,NARAYANAPPA,, S/O,LATE,SRI.,APPAYYANNA,,

AGED,ABOUT,75,YEARS,, RESIDING,IN, RAMAGONDANAHALLI,, YELAHANKA,HOBLI,,

BENGALURU,-,560,064.,

…PETITIONER,

(BY,SMT.,ANUSHA,NANDISH,,ADVOCATE),

AND:(

Digitally ( signedtiby

1., BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,AUTHORITY,NAGAVENI Location:0High BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,, Courttiof Karnataka AUTHORITY,PRECINCTS,, 5TH,MAIN,RD,,KUMARAPARK,WEST,, GUTTAHALLI,,BENGALURU,-,560,020,, REPRESENTED,BY,THE,COMMISSIONER., ,

2., SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER, (DR.,SHIVARAM,KARANTH,LAYOUT,KEMPANAHALLI), BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,, AUTHORITY,PRECINCTS,,, 5TH,MAIN,RD,,KUMARAPARK,WEST,,, NC:(2025:KHC:17203-DB( WP(No.(8157(of(2025( ( ( ( ( GUTTAHALLI,,BENGALURU,-,560,020, …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SHIVAPRASAD,SHANTANAGOUDAR,,ADVOCATE), , THIS, WRIT, PETITION, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, a., ISSUE, A, WRIT, OF, MANDAMUS,, ANY, ORDER, (s)/DIRECTIONS, DIRECTING, THE, RESPONDENT, Nos., 1, AND, 2, TO, CONSIDER, THE,REPRESENTATION,DATED,NIL,FILED,ON,30.06.2021,AND, ACKNOWLEDGMENT,BEARING,No.,384441,DATED,30.06.2021, WITH, RESPECT, TO, THE, RESIDENTIAL, HOUSE, IN, WITH, RESPECT, TO, TWO, RESIDENTIAL, HOUSES, IN, Sy., No., 30/1B,, MEASURING, 18, GUNTAS,, IN, RAMAGONDANAHALLI, VILLAGE,, YELAHANKA, HOBLI,, BENGALURU, NORTH, TALUK,, BENGALURU, FOR,THE,PURPOSE,OF,REGULARIZATION,OF,THE,PETITIONERS, RESIDENTIAL, HOUSES, INTO, THE, Dr., SHIVARAMKARANTH, LAYOUT,(ANNEXURE-A,AND,B),AND,ISSUE,A,CERTIFICATE,OF, REGULARIZATION,WITHIN,A,PERIOD,OF,2,WEEKS,AND,ETC.,, , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, , CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR,JUSTICE,KRISHNA,S,DIXIT, ,and,, ,HON'BLE,MR,JUSTICE,M.NAGAPRASANNA, ,

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶1The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: "a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, any Order(s)/Directions directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to consider the Representation dated nil filed on 30.06.2021 and Acknowledgment bearing No. 384441 dated 30.06.2021 with respect to the residential house in with respect to two residential houses in Sy. No. 30/1B, measuring 18 guntas, in Ramagondanahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru for the purpose of regularization of the Petitioners' residential houses into the Dr. Shivaramkarath Layout (ANNEXURE - A & B) and issue a Certificate of Regularization within a period of 2 weeks;

b. Issue any other Writ, Order(s)/Direction(s) as may deem fit by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and equity."

¶2Heard Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Shivaprasad M. Shantanagoudar, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

¶3Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had constructed the residential houses in the year 2007, long before the issuance of the preliminary notification dated 30.12.2008 and later, the petitioners have constructed the subsequent properties prior to

the issuance of the final notification. The petitioner submitted representation for regularization of their houses so constructed. The representation not having met its consideration, have preferred this petition before this Court.

¶4Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel for the respondents – BDA submits that if reasonable time is granted, the representation of the petitioner would be considered and necessary orders would be passed in accordance with law.

¶5In the light of the aforesaid submission, we deem it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER a. The writ petition is allowed. b. The respondents – Bangalore Development Authority to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 30.06.2021, which has acknowledgement bearing No.384441 dated

30.06.2021, forthwith. c. The respondents – Bangalore Development Authority shall also communicate the order that

would be passed on the representations, to the petitioner. d. Till the consideration of the representation happens, the parties are directed to maintain status quo, qua the properties of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly.

Sd/- (KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5 CT: BHK

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.