KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1413 OF 2026 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD
PENSIONERS UNION (R)
HAVING REGD. OFFICE AT CAUVERY BHAVAN,
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
SRI MARULA SIDDAPPA,
AGED 77 YEARS,
S/O LATE GANGAPPA,
RD
R/O H.NO.79, 3 MAIN ROAD,
MARUTHINAGAR, NAGARABHAVI MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 072.
2. SRI B.N. NANJAPPA,
AGED 84 YEARS,
S/O LATE SRI. NINGEGOWDA,
R/O NO.16, 'PREETHI NILAYA',
KHB EXTENSION, NANDINI LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 096.
3. SRI. PUTTAIAH H.K.,
AGED 78 YEARS,
S/O LATE KENCHEGOWDA,
TH
R/O NO.108, 4 MAIN, KEB LAYOUT,
ST
BTM 1 STAGE, BENGALURU-560 029.
4. SRI. R. NAGARAJA,
AGED 79 YEARS,
S/O LATE RANGAPPA,
Digitally signed
by MALA K N
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
TH
R/O NO.957, 16 B CROSS,
KHB IIND STAGE,
YELAHANKA NEW TOWN,
BENGALURU-560 064.
5. SRI. G.M. SHIVARUDRACHARY,
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
S/O LATE MALLACHARY,
ND
R/O NO.4288, 2 STAGE,
KUMARA SWAMY LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 063.
6. SRI. V. NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED 79 YEARS,
S/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA,
TH
R/O NO.423, 15 'B' CROSS,
'B' SECTOR, IIND STAGE,
YELAHANKA NEW TOWN,
BENGALURU-560 064.
7. SRI. H. NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED 79 YEARS,
S/O LATE HANUMAPPA,
R/O THAMBIHALLI, HUTHUR POST,
KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT.
8. SRI. H. NANJAPPA
AGED 83 YEARS,
S/O LATE SHIVANNAGOWDA,
R/O NO.1576, IST CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 040.
9. SRI. J.M. NAGANNA SETTY,
AGED 82 YEARS,
S/O MUDDA SETTY,
R/O NO.9, MIG, KHB COLONY,
K.NARAYANAPURA, BENGALURU-560 077.
10. SRI. N.K. RANGARAMU,
AGED 75 YEARS,
S/O LATE R. KRISHNAMURTHY,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
TH
R/O NO.367, 10 CROSS,
NIMISHAMBANAGARA, KUVEMPUNAGAR,
MYSORE-570 023.
11. SRI. B.N. SHIVARAJU,
AGED 82 YEARS,
S/O LATE NANJUNDEGOWDA,
RD
R/O NO.94, 23 MAIN, POST OFFICE ROAD,
J.P. NAGAR, IIND STAGE,
BENGALURU-560 078.
12. SRI. GOPALAPPA,
AGED 75 YEARS,
S/O LATE RAMAIAH,
R/O NO.232, PRASHANTHANAGAR,
WARD NO.22, DEVANAHALLI-560 110.
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
13. SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S
AGED 80 YEARS,
S/O M.S. SIDDALINGAIAH,
TH TH
R/O NO.1069, 16 MAIN, 7 CROSS,
ST
1 STAGE, BTM LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 029.
14. SMT. LEELAVATHY
AGED 78 YEARS,
W/O A. MOHAN RAJ,
RD TH
R/O NO.103, 3 CROSS, 7 BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 095.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SADANAND G SHASTRI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING,
VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
3. THE KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
RD TH
3 & 4 FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN,
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. H.L PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/3 IN
CP NO.12276/26)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO I)SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
OFFICE ORDER DATED 27/03/2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.23290/2025 AND II)ALLOW IN TOTO
WP NO.23290/2025 AS PRAYED FOR BY THESE APPELLANTS
AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The appellants/petitioners are the ex-employees of the
Karnataka Housing Board (‘KHB’). There was some discussion
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
for allotting the house sites to the ex-employees in the KHB on
preferential basis, however, it appears that so far as the former
employees of the KHB are concerned, the Finance Department,
Government of Karnataka put an objection and therefore, the
earlier decision to allot the preferential sites got cancelled. The
petitioners filed the Writ Petition before the Court praying for
the following relief:
I) “Issue writ of certiorari, order or direction to quash the
impugned order/endorsement in No.VaE 92 KaGruMa
2024 dated 11.06.2025. Vide Annexure –A and
Impugned Order/endorsement in No. VaE 173 KaGruMa
2024 dated 27/28.11.2024 Vide Annexure-B both issued
by respondent No.1;
II) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
st
directing 1 respondent State Government to accord
approval and sanction for allotment of 96 sites to 96
rd
retired employees of 3 respondent Board on the
rd
proposal submitted by 3 respondent under proposal
letter dated 15.03.2025 vide Annexure –X and
III) Issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction to
respondents for allotment of 96 sites reserved for 96
retired employees as per list vide Annexure-R in the
facts and circumstances of the case, including award of
cost of the writ petition in the interest of justice and
equity.”
2. The learned Single Judge has considered the prayer
and submission and held that the object and purpose of KHB is
to provide housing to the needy in the society who would not
have the house and the KHB should not allot the sites to those
who already own a house or site. It has been further held that
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
the petitioners would not have any right to ask for allotment of
sites on preferential basis, only on the basis of they being the
ex-employees of the KHB. There cannot be discrimination in
their favour against other persons who want sites on the
ground that the petitioners are the ex-employees, and
therefore, preferential treatment should be given to them.
3. We have considered the judgment and submissions
advanced on behalf of the appellants/petitioners.
4. The appellants/petitioners do not have legal or the
fundamental right seeking preferential allotment of sites simply
they being the former employees of the KHB they cannot seek
a Writ of Mandamus from this Court for preferential treatment.
Appellant/petitioners must demonstrate a legal or the
fundamental right and corresponding duty of the respondent-
authorities to enforce the said right in their favour. There is no
such right vested in the petitioners. Learned Single Judge has
rightly rejected the Writ Petition. We find no ground to interfere
with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned
Single Judge. However, as and when applications are invited for
allotment of the sites by the KHB, the appellants/petitioners
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57060-DB
WA No. 1413 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010324722026
may also participate or apply for the allotment of the sites if
they so required.
The amount submitted by the petitioners while applying
for allotment of site under the preferential category, should be
refunded to them forthwith on proper identification. With the
aforesaid observation, we dispose of the appeal.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN)
JUDGE
BVK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1