Sri. G. Siddagangaiah v. State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:15146-DB( WP(No.(35008(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(13 (DAY(OF(MARCH,(2026(

PRESENT( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R(DEVDAS( AND(( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(M.NAGAPRASANNA(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(35008(OF(2025((LA-BDA)( ( ( BETWEEN:((

( SRI.,G.,SIDDAGANGAIAH, SON,OF,LATE.,GANGAIAH,

AGED,ABOUT,86,YEARS, R/A,NO.820,,GAYATHRI,NILAYA,,, JALAHALLI,,HESSARAGATTHA,,, BENGALURU,560,097., …PETITIONER,

(BY,SRI.,ROHAN,HOSMATH.,,ADVOCATE), Digitally signedtiby ( YASHODA0K0L AND:( Location: (HIGH0COURT

1.,OF STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT,OF,HOUSING,AND,, URBAN,DEVELOPMENT,, VIDHANA,SOUDHA, REP.,BY,ITS,SECRETARY, ,

2., BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,AUTHORITY, KUMARA,PARK,WEST,,T.,CHOWDIAH,ROAD,, BENGALURU,-,560,020, REP.,BY,ITS,COMMISSIONER, NC:(2026:KHC:15146-DB( WP(No.(35008(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

3., SPECIAL,LAND,ACQUISITION,OFFICER, DR.,K,SHIVARAM,KARANTH,LAYOUT, OFFICE,OF,BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,AUTHORITY, KUMARA,PARK,WEST,,T.,CHOWDIAH,ROAD,, BENGALURU,-,560,020, ,

4., ASSISTANT,EXECUTIVE,ENGINEER, DR.,K,SHIVARAM,KARANTH,LAYOUT,, OFFICE,OF,BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,AUTHORITY, KUMARA,PARK,WEST,,T.,CHOWDIAH,ROAD,, BENGALURU,-,560,020., , …RESPONDENTS, , (BY,SRI.,M.RAJAKUMAR.,,AGA,FOR,R1, ,,,,,,SRI.,SHIVAPRASAD.M.SHANTANAGOUDAR.,,ADVOCATE,, ,,,,,,FOR,R2,TO,R4), , , , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLE,226,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, ISSUE, A, WRIT,, ORDER, OR, DECLARATION, IN, THE, NATURE, OF, CERTIORARI, QUASHING, THE, IMPUGNED, ENDORSEMENT, DT.04.07.2025, BEARING,NO.BEM.AA.PRA/KA.AA/D.S.K.L/218/205-26,,ISSUED, BY,THE,R2,INSOFAR,AS,THE,SCHEDULE,PROPERTY,PRODUCED, AT,ANNEXURE-H,AND,ETC.,, , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, ,

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayers;

(a) Issue a writ, order or declaration in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned endorsement dated 04.07.2025 bearing No.Bem.Aa.Pra/Ka.Aa/D.S.K.L/ 218/2025-26, issued by the Respondent No.2 insofar as the schedule property produced at Annexure-H;

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to allot an equivalent extent of developed site on land-to-land basis and pay additional compensation for the building which was demolished;

(c) Issue any other writ, order directions as may be necessary in the interest of justice and equity.

¶2Heard Sri Rohan Hosamath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri M.Rajkumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent – State and Sri Shivaprasad.M.Shanthanagoundar, learned counsel appearing for respondents –Bangalore Development Authority and have perused the material on record.

¶3The learned counsel Sri Rohan Hosmath, appearing for the petitioner taking this Court to the documents appended to the petition would seek to demonstrate that issue in this petition stands covered by a particular order passed by this court in W.P.No.20971/2022 disposed of on 04.12.2024. The learned counsel would further submit that the endorsement that was issued by the Bangalore Development Authority should stand quashed in the light of the issue answered in the aforesaid order.

¶4The learned counsel Sri Shivaprasad. M. Shantanagoudar, representing the Bangalore Development

Authority would submit that the Bopaiah Committee now is empowered by this Court to go into the details of whether the constructions existed prior to the notification or have come up after the notification. In that light, the matter also could be referred back to the Bopaiah Committee for a factual assessment with regard to the existence of the structures/building prior to the notification or after the notification.

¶5This Court, while entertaining the petition, has granted an interim order of status quo to be maintained by the parties till the proceedings would conclude in the light of the matter being remitted back to the hands of the Bopaiah Committee for consideration afresh to bear in mind the observations made in the course of the order, we deem it appropriate to dispose the subject petition with a direction to the Bopaiah Committee to enter upon the issue of whether the subject construction has come up prior to the notification or after the notification and pass necessary orders thereon. The committee shall decide the

issue as is indicated herein above with an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order if not earlier, in accordance with law. Till such time, the status quo in the subject petition shall continue.

¶6In the event, the committee would conclude that construction in the subject land has come up prior to the final notification, the Bangalore Development Authority shall grant benefit to the petitioners in accordance with law as is done in other cases.

¶7In the light of the aforesaid observations, as a matter of form, the impugned endorsement stands quashed.

Sd/- (R. DEVDAS) JUDGE

Sd/- (M. NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

KLY CT: JL