MR. M. K. NAGARAJA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 27377 OF 2026 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
1.
MR. M. K. NAGARAJA
S/O. LATE KALEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
R/AT KOTHANAVALLI/
MALLIGENAHALLI
KOPPALU VILLAGE,
KOTTANAHALLI,
PIRIYAPATNA TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT - 571102.
2. DR. SRINIVAS N
S/O. SRI M K NAGARAJA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT NO.644, P.H. ROAD
BETTADAPURA VILLAGE
BETTADAPURA HOBLI,
PIRIYAPATNA TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT - 571102
…PETITIONERS
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. NISHANTH A V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
SOUDHA BUILDING
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGAR
BENGALURU- 560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. MYSURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CHAMARAJAPURA
JHANSI RANI
LAKSHMI BAI ROAD
LAKSHMIPURAM, MYSURU- 570005
CHAMARAJAPURAM MOHALLA
REPRESENTED BY
ITS COMMISSIONER.
3. HOOTAGALLI CITY MUNICIPAL
COUNCIL OFFICE AT S.R.S,
HIGH-TENSION JOINT ROAD,
HUTAGALLI
MYSURU-570018
REPRESENTED BY ITS
COMMISSIONER.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAJAYOGA K., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. G.M. ANAND., ADOVCATE FOR R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ENDORSEMENT DATED 30.07.2026 BEARING NO.HTG-
LBPAS-01895/26-27/BP PASSED BY RESPONDENT
NO.3, VIDE ANNEXURE-A; B. SETTING ASIDE THE
ENDORSEMENT DATED 13.07.2026 BEARING
NO.MYAAPRA:NAYOSHA: NA.AA.: NAYO-02/ 2026-27
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, VIDE ANNEXURE-B; C.
DIRECTING RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 TO ACCORD
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
SANCTION OF THE BUILDING LICENSE/PLAN TO THE
PETITIONERS TO PUT UP A COMMERCIAL BUILDING
OVER THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners assert ownership of a property
measuring 15 Meters x 24 Meters bearing Site No.1,
HIG-II, Group-II, II Phase, KHB Colony, Hootagalli,
Mysuru City [the subject property ], and the
petitioners' grievance is with the third respondent’s
Endorsement dated 30.07.2026 [Annexure-A] and the
second respondent's Communication dated
13.07.2026 [ Annexure-B ]. The second and third
respondents have issued their respective
Endorsements informing the petitioners that,
because the subject property is within a residential
area, it cannot be admitted to a Sanctioned
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
Plan/Building License to construct a commercial
property.
2. Sri Nishanth A V, the learned counsel for
the petitioners, submits that the following to support
the petitioners’ grievance with the impugned
Endorsement/ Communication.
[a] The subject property is along a Commercial
Axes as defined under Regulation 6.6.1 of
the Zoning of Land Use and Development
Control Regulations [ for short, ‘the Zoning
Regulations’ ] published by the second
respondent.
[b] The petitioners, without knowing that the
Zoning Regulations enabled them to put
the property to commercial use subject to
necessary approval, filed an application
with the second respondent for Building
License only to be told that they cannot be
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
issued with Building License for
construction of a commercial building in
the subject property because the property
is within a residential zone,
[c] The third respondent for the very reason,
has issued the impugned Endorsement
dated 30.07.2026.
3. Sri Nishanth A V submits that it cannot
be disputed that the petitioners’ subject property is
along a 24 meter wide road and beyond the Outer
Ring Road ; that if a property is outside Outer Ring
Road and abutting a road that is 24 meters in width
will be in the Commercial Axes Zone where
commercial activity is permitted; that the efficacy of
the Zoning Regulations in this regard is considered
by this Court in the writ petition in W.P.
No.3603/2023; and that this Court, by Order dated
26.10.2023 and after reference to the commercial
uses that could be permitted in Commercial Axes, has
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
quashed a similar Endorsement directing the second
respondent to consider admitting the concerned to a
Commercial Plan .
4. Sri Rajayoga K, a learned High Court
Government Pleader for the first respondent, Sri H C
Shivaramu, a learned standing counsel for the
second respondent and Sri G M Anand, a learned
standing counsel for the third respondent, are called
upon to accept notice for the respective respondents,
[ and this Court must observe that Sri G.M. Anand was
on record in the writ petition in W.P. No.3603/2023 ].
The learned standing counsels are heard on whether
this petition could be disposed of treating the
impugned Endorsement dated 30.07.2026 [Annexure-
A] as a Show Cause Notice to the petitioners with
liberty to respond to the same calling upon the third
respondent to examine the Response and decide on
the petitioners' request in the light of the petitioners'
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
reliance on this Court's order dated 26.10.2023 in
the writ petition in W.P. No.3603/2023.
5. This Court must observe that the
significance of a property being recognized as a
property on a Commercial Axes in terms of Regulation
6.6.1 of the Zoning Regulations is considered in
elaborately by this Court in the writ petition in W.P.
No.3603/2023. This Court has finally opined thus:
“22. In the present case as afore observed, the
designation of the property as commercial axes
and usage being permitted in terms of C-3
would not come within the ambit of Para 42 of
the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court but would
be covered by the Master Plan already issued
by the State and the Development Control
Regulations formulated thereunder.
23. In that view of the matter, I answer the
above point by holding that the sanction of
plan submitted by the petitioner would not
come within the purview of Para 42 of the
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court and as
such, the petitioner would be entitled for
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
sanction of the said plan in terms of Regulation
6.6 of the Development Control Regulations.”
This Court has directed the second respondent to
grant Sanction Plan for construction.
6. It is not in contest that this Court’s view
prevails and that if the petitioners' property could be
recognized as a property on Commercial Axes in
terms of 6.6.1 of the Zoning Regulations, the third
1
respondent will have to first verify whether the
petitioners' property could be recognized as being on
a Commercial Axes. If this Court's decision in the writ
petition in W.P. No.3603/2023 has remained the final
expression on the proposition, the second respondent
will have to reason why the petitioners must not be
admitted to the approval for constructing a
commercial Building.
1
The Authority which has to admit the petitioners to
Sanction Plan/Building License
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
7. This Court must also observe that if the
third respondent cannot offer cogent reasons if the
petitioners' subject property is indeed along a
Commercial Axes , the petitioners must be admitted to
the Sanctioned Plan for construction of a commercial
building. In the light of the afore, this Court finds
that interests of justice would be served if the
impugned Endorsement dated 30.07.2026 is read as
a Show Cause Notice with liberty to the petitioners to
file their Response enclosing a certified copy of this
order calling upon the third respondent to
communicate the decision in the light of this Court's
order within a certain timeline. Hence the following.
ORDER
[a] The petition stands disposed of treating
the third respondent’s Endorsement
dated 30.07.2026 [Annexure-A] as a
Show Cause Notice.
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:52864
WP No. 27377 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010602182026
[b] The petitioners are reserved with liberty
to file Response along with a certified
copy of this order within a week from
the date of receipt thereof.
[c] The third respondent, within six [6]
weeks from the date of receipt of the
certified copy and the Response, shall
communicate either the approval or
communicate the decision to approve
the plan and issue Building License for
commercial construction or
communicate the decision otherwise by
assigning cogent reasons in the light of
this Court's observation.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
AN/-