THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
rd
DATED THIS THE 3 DAY OF JUNE, 2026
®
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
WRIT APPEAL NO. 606 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1123 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1124 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1136 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1152 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1157 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1162 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1163 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1165 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1182 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1194 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1225 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B K
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1238 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1273 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1722 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1734 OF 2025 (LA-BDA)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 419 OF 2026 (LA-BDA)
IN WA No. 606/2025
BETWEEN:
1. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY HIS COMMISSIONER
CHOWDAIAH ROAD
KUMARA PARK
- 2 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
BENGALURU 560003
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARA PARK WEST T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD
BENGALURU-560020
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GURUDAS .S. KANNUR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MURUGESH V.CHARATI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDANA SOUDHA DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR BEEDI
BENGALURU 56001
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY
2. H. NAGARAJAIAH
S/O HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, 6TH STATE,
3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BANGALORE SOUTH-560062
3. NAGARAJAPAP ALIAS NAGARAJ
SON OF KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
NO.43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
TALAGHATTAPURA
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMLPLE,
BANGALORE SOUTH-560062
4. VAJRAPPA,
SON OF HONMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
NO.43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA
BANGALORE SOUTH-560062
- 3 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
5. SIDDAGANGAPPA
SON OF MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
NO.109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA
BENGALURU SOUTH-560062.
6. SRI. G.BHARGAVA KUMAR REDDY,
S/O SRI.GUNIKUNTALA SUDANANDA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
7. SMT. ANUSHA.N
W/O G.BHARGAVA KUMAR REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/AT No.45/2-227-1,
BALAJINAGAR, S.V.DEGREE COLLEGE,
KADAPA, ANDHRA PRADESH-516001.
AND ALSO AT: No.27/A,
ST
1 CROSS, HOSAKEREHALLI EXTENSION.
(I.A.1/2025 FOR IMPLEADING APPLICATION
ALLOWED ON 13.01.2026 IN R/O R6 & R7)
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. NAGARAJAIAH.H, ADVOCATE FOR R2-R5;
SRI. HARISH H.V AND SRI.H.T.NATARAJ, ADVOCATES
FOR PROPOSED IMPLEADING RESPONDENTS.)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
27.01.2025 IN WP No. 16865/2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
SINGLE JUDGE AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL BY DISMISSING
THE WRIT PETITION, ETC.
IN WA NO. 1123/2025:
BETWEEN:
- 4 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
1. SRI.V.PRAKASH
S/O.LATE V. VENKATESH,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
TH
R/AT NO.3142, 7 MAIN ROAD,
INDIRANAGAR BENGALURU-560 038
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA. H.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI.HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
TH RD TH
6 STAGE, 3 BLOCK, 30 ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
- 5 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO PASS THE
FOLLOWING ORDER AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
27/01/2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WP NO.16865/2022, ETC.
IN WA NO. 1124/2025
BETWEEN:
1. MR SUNIL VIMALA RAGHUNATHARAJU
S/O. LATE RAGHUNATHA RAJU VALLABHARAJU,
AGED ABOUT, 33 YEARS,
R/AT, NO. 29, 6TH CROSS,
SWAMI VIVEKANANDA ROAD,
BALAJI LAYOUT, BANGALURU-560094.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA. H.T, ADVOCATE)
- 6 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDALAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI.HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
NO.43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
NO.43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
- 7 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
NO.109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AG FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE., FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27.01.2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No. 16865/2022 (LA-
BDA), ETC.
IN WA NO. 1136/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.SUNDAR RAJ
S/O GOPAL RAO.A.
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
R/AT NO.577/55.
KRISHNA KAMALA ENCLAVE,
UTTARAHALLI, BANGALORE-560 061
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA H.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.
- 8 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. BR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDALAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST, T.CHOWDALAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI. HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK,
30TH ROAD, CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
- 9 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27.01.2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No. 16865/2022
(LA-BDA), ETC.
IN WA NO. 1152/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.G.BHARGAVA KUMAR REDDY
S/0.SN.GUNIKUNTALA SUDANANDA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
2. SMT.ANUSHA.N
W/O.G.BHARGAVA KUMAR REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
BOTH RESIDING AT
NO.45/2-227-1,
BALAJINAGAR, S.V.DEGREE
KADAPA,
ANDHRA PRADESH-516 001
AND ALSO AT
ST
NO.27/A, 1 MAIN,
ST
1 CROSS,
HOSAKEREHALLI EXTENSION
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. NATARAJA.H.T., ADVOCATE)
- 10 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI. HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
- 11 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No-16865/2022 (LA-BDA), ETC.
IN WA NO. 1157/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI R SREENIVAS
S/O. LATE D.P.RAMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
2. SMT.S.AMRUTHA,
W/O.SRI.R.SREENIVAS,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.51,
ST
"HARITHASA", 1 CROSS,
RD
3 MAIN ROAD,
BANASHANKARI
RD
3 STAGE,
BANGALORE-560 085
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. NATARAJA.H.T., ADVOCATE)
- 12 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI. HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
TH RD TH
6 STAGE, 3 BLOCK, 30 ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
- 13 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27/01/2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.16865/2022, ETC.
IN WA NO. 1162/2025
BETWEEN:
1.
2.
SRI.SANJEEV RAYUDU MENTA
S/O. LATE SANJEEVALAH MENTA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
SRI.MENTA SANJEEV KRISHNA PRANEETH,
S/O.SANJEEV RAYUDU MENTA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
NO. 1971, SANJEEVA SADAN,
SOUTH END D MAIN ROAD,
9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 069
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. NATARAJA.H.T., ADVOCATE)
- 14 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI.HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK,
30TH ROAD, CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA
ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O SRI. KARIYAPPA,
ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
- 15 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No-16865/2022 (LA-BDA).
IN WA NO. 1163/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.S.VENKATA RAMANA MURTHY
S/O LATE S SATYA NARAYANA MURTHY.
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/AT #604, PELICON BLOCK,
CELESITA APARTMENT, T.C. PALYA MAIN ROAD,
BHATTARAIHALLI, BANGALORE-560 049.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA H.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
- 16 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 020.
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 020.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI.HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI. KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
- 17 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 27/01/2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.16865/2022 AND
GRANT ANY SUCH OTHER RELIEFS.
IN WA NO. 1165/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.ROHINI S.NAIR
W/O.SRI.P.SADASHIVAN,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
R/AT NO.803, 2ND 'D' CROSS,
8TH MAIN ROAD, 1 BLOCK,
HRBR LAYOUT,
KALYANANAGARA,
BENGALURU-560 043.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA.H.T.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
- 18 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI. HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O. SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
- 19 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
THIS WRIT APPEAL ISFILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27.01.2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No. 16865/2022
(LA-BDA), ETC.
IN WA NO. 1182/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. B J ASHA
W/O SRI RAMAPRASAD H N,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT NO. C5-6126, CEDAR BLOCK,
SOBHA FOREST VIEW, 100 FT ROAD,
OPP KANAKAPURA ROAD,
ADJACENT TO MAHADESWARA TEMPLE
BSK 6TH STAGE, THALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU 560 109.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJ.H.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560001
2. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARA PARK WEST
T CHOWDAIAH ROAD
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU - 560020
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARA PARK WEST
T CHOWDAIAH ROAD
BENGALURU - 560003
- 20 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
4. SRI H NAGARAJAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
SON OF HONAMARAPPA
R/AT 175, ANUGRAHA 6TH STAGE
3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA
TALAGHATTAPURA POST
BANGALORE SOUTH 560062
5. SRI. NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ
SON OF SRI KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
#43 CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMLPLE
TALAGHATTAPURA
BANGALORE SOUTH 560062
6. SRI VAJRAPPA
SON OF HONMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE
TALAGHATTAPURA
BANGALORE SOUTH 560062
7. SRI SIDDAGANGAPPA
SON OF SRI MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE
THALAGATTAPURA
BANGLAORE SOUTH
BENGALURU 560062
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 27/01/2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
- 21 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.16865/2022, ETC.
IN WA NO. 1194/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI ANIL M S
D/O M S SHDAKSHARIAH,
AGE ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT NO 305, KEERTHI MANOR,
BEHIND BEML GATE
G M PALYA, NEW THIPPASANDRA,
BANGALORE - 560075
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA.H.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560001
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARA PARK WEST
T CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU - 560003
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
KUMARA PARK WEST
T CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560003
4. SRI H NAGARAJAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
SON OF HONAMARAPPA
R/AT 175 ANUGRAHA
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA
- 22 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
TALAGHATTAPURA POST
BANGALORE SOUTH 560062
5. SRI NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
SON OF KARIYAPPA
NO 43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE
TALAGHATTAPURA
BANGALORE SOUTH -560062
6. SRI VAJRAPPA
S/O SRI. HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
SON OF HONMARAPPA
NO 43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE
TALAGHATTAPURA
BANGALORE SOUTH 560062
7. SRI SIDDAGANGAPPA
S/O SRI. MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE
TALAGHATTAPURA
BANGALORE SOUTH 560062
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No-16865/2022 (LA-BDA).
IN WA NO. 1225/2025
BETWEEN:
- 23 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
1. SRI.V.RAMADASS
S/O.SRI.K. VENKATARAMAN,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT NO.2224, 15TH 'B' CROSS,
21ST 'A' MAIN, SECTOR-I,
HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 102.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NATARAJA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU-560 003.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMAR PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 003.
4. SRI.H.NAGARAJAIAH,
S/O.SRI.HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.175, ANUGRAHA,
6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
5. SRI.NAGARAJAPPA ALIAS NAGARAJ,
S/O.SRI.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
- 24 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
6. SRI.VAJRAPPA,
S/O.SRI.HONMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
#43, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA,
BENGALURU SOUTH-560 062.
7. SRI.SIDDAGANGAPPA,
S/O.SRI.MARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
#109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
THALAGATTAPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH
BENGALURU -560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 27/01/2025, PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO.16865/2022, ETC.
IN WA NO. 1238/2025
BETWEEN:
1. A SREENIVASA
SON OF ANANTHAPADMANABAIAH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT FLAT NO. A-G3,
SHIVA HERITAGE APARTMENTS,
5TH AND 6TH MAIN ROAD,
KUVEMPUNAGAR, DODDAKALASANDRA,
BENGALURU 560 062 (SITE NO. 519)
- 25 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
2. RB BHAGAWAN
SON OF RD BILIGIRAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 522, 3RD BLOCK,
BANASHANKARI 6TH STAGE,
BENGALURU 560 109 (SITE NO. 522)
3. ABHISHEK YT
SON OF DR. Y D THIMMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 964, 14TH MAIN,
BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU 560 070
(SITE NO. 556)
4. SWAPNA GR
WIFE OF ABHISHEK YT
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 964, 14TH MAIN,
BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU 560 070
(SITE NO. 556)
5. DR. CS KANTHARAJ
SON OF CHOWDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 21,
III MAIN ROAD, III CROSS,
PAUL CHINNAPPA LAYOUT,
BIKASIPURA ISRO LAYOUT,
BENGALURU 560 061 (SITE NO. 560)
6. ARAVIND KODLAMOGARU
SON OF K SUBBA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY KRISHNAPRASADA K
SON OF K SUBBARAO
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 106/2,
LAKESHORE HOMES, KASAVANAHALLI,
BENGALURU 560 0325 (SITE NO. 561)
- 26 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
7. SMT. LAKSHMIPRIYA KRISHNA MURTHY
WIFE OF ASHWATH VIJAYKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 70/A,
MOUNT JOY EXTENSION,
III MAIN ROAD, HANUMANTHANAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 019 (SITE NO. 584)
8. SMT. SARASWATHI CA
WIFE OF K RAVI,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
RESIDING AT 6/3, 1 FLOOR,
SVM MANSION, E NO. 2ND ST. DK ST. CROSS.
SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 001 (SITE NO. 586)
9. MANI MURTHY
SON OF M MANI
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 592,
4TH MAIN, 60FT ROAD,
BEML LAYOUT, 4TH STAGE,
RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 098 (SITE NO. 599)
10. JM RAJA MANIKYAM
SON OF L G JOHN
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 453, I A CROSS,
8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU 560 095 (SITE NO. 600)
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K PATEL MUNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR
A1, A3, A4, A6-A10)
AND:
1. H NAGARAJAIAH
SON OF HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 175, 6TH STAGE,
- 27 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
III BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH 560 062
2. NAGARAJAPPA @ NAGARAJ
SON OF KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU 560 062
3. VAJRAPPA
SON OF HONMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA, NEAR KABBHALAMMA
TEMPLE, TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU 560 062
4. SIDDAGANGAPPA
SON OF MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 109,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
5. STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR. BR AMBEDKAR BEEDI,
BENGLAURU 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
6. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARAPARK,
BENGALURU 560 003
- 28 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
7. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARAPARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU 560 020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R5;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
TH
ORDER DATED 27 OF JANUARY 2025 PASSED IN WRIT
PETITION No. 16865 OF 2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE AND TO CONSEQUENTIALLY DISMISS THE
WRIT PETITION, IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
IN WA NO. 1273/2025
BETWEEN:
1. DR. CK RAVIPRAKASH
SON OF LATE KN CHANDUR
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #2727,
12TH MAIN, E BLOCK,
SUBRAMANYANAGAR,
RAJAJINAGAR II STAGE,
BENGALURU 560 010
(SITE NO. 462)
2. C PURUSHOTHAMANI
SON OF LATE V CHANGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #478,
3RD BLOCK, BANASHNAKARI
VI STAGE, BENGALURU 560 062
(SITE NO. 478)
- 29 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
3. EXIGER TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS
REGISTERED OFFICE AT
#679/57, 30TH CROSS, TILAK NAGAR,
TH
JAYANAGAR, 4 T BLOCK,
BENGALURU 560 041
AND IS REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
KRISHNAKUMAR BN (SITE NO. 419)
4. VISHWANATH SANGAPPA UPPIN
SON OF LATE SANGAPPA RUDRAPPA UPPIN,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT UMA NIVAS PINTO ROAD,
HUBLI 580020 (SITE NO. 492)
5. S SRINIVAS
SON OF LATE SUBBARAJU
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #1580, 25TH CROSS,
30TH MAIN, BANASHANKARI
II STAGE, BENGALURU 560 070
(SITE NO. 546)
6. SMT.RASHMI SHRINIVAS
WIFE OF SHRINIVAS K AMMINALLI,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
(SITE NO. 589)
7. SMT. DEEPTHI S NAYAK
DAUGHTER OF SHRINIVAS K AMMINALLI
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
(SITE NO. 589)
8. SMT. TRUPTHI S NAYAK
DAUGHTER OF SHRINIVAS K AMMINALLI
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
(SITE No.589)
APPELLANTS 6 TO 8 ARE
RESIDING AT 47, TRUPTI,
4TH MAIN, II BLOCK, III STAGE,
- 30 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
BASAVESHWARNAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 079
9. SUDHIR PRABHU
SON OF R PRABHU
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HIS
POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
R PRABHU, SON OF LATE RUDRAMUNIAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #195, I FLOOR,
4TH CROSS, SARASWATHINAGAR,
VIJAYANAGAR EXTENSION,
BENGALURU 560 040 (SITE NO. 591)
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.N.PHANINDRA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. ABHINAY YT., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. H NAGARAJAIAH
SON OF HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #175,
6TH STAGE, III BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH 560 062
2. NAGARAJAPPA @ NAGARAJ
SON OF KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
3. VAJRAPPA
SON OF HONMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
- 31 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
4. SIDDAGANGAPPA
SON OF MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 109, CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
5. STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. BR AMBEDKAR BEEDI,
BENGLAURU 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
6. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
CHOWDIA ROAD, KUMARAPARK,
BENGALURU 560 003
7. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARAPARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU 560 020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 27/01/2025 PASSED IN WP NO.16865/2022
BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND TO
CONSEQUENTIALLY DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION.
IN WA NO. 1722/2025
BETWEEN:
1. N RAJASHEKAR
SON OF NINGAPPA
- 32 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #5,
1ST CROSS, KUMARA PARK WEST,
BENGALURU 560 020 (SITE NO. 406)
2. V SREELALAN
SON OF SV SUBRAMANIAN
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #015-B,
CYNOSURE ADITHYA SAIGNE,
SIVANANDA NAGAR,
NEAR BEML WATER TANK,
BENGALURU 560 075 (SITE NO. 465)
3. S A SHASHIKIRAN
SON OF ANANTHA SALAGAME,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #A7 103,
ELITA PROMENADA,
18TH MAIN ROAD, JP NAGAR, 7TH PHASE,
BENGALURU 560 078 (SITE NO. 466)
4. SUDHAKAR KRISHNAMURTHY,
SON OF NV KRISHNAMURTHY,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #419, 9TH CROSS,
8TH MAIN, BTM 2ND STAGE.
BENGALURU 560 076 (SITE NO. 609)
5. K DIVIJA, SON OF K KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT RAMADASA COMPOUND,
GOPALPURA ROAD,
CHITRADURGA 577 501 (SITE NO. 610)
6. T VISHWANATH RAI
SON OF LATE T NARAYAN RAI
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #412,
THUNGABHADRA BLOCK,
4TH FLOOR, NATIONAL GAMES VILLAGE,
- 33 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 045
(SITE NO. 715)
7. SRINIVAS.B, SON OF S BALASUBRAMANIAN
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
AND RESIDING AT #965, III CROSS,
RD
I BLOCK, HAL 3 STAGE,
BANGALORE 560075
(SITE No.552)
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. KARTHIK.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. H NAGARAJAIAH
SON OF HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #175, 6TH STAGE,
III BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH 560 062
2. NAGARAJAPPA @ NAGARAJ
SON OF KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU 560 062
3. VAJRAPPA
SON OF HONMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
- 34 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
4. SIDDAGANGAPPA
SON OF MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT 109,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
5. STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR. BR AMBEDKAR BEEDI,
BENGLAURU 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF SECRETARY
6. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
KUMARAPARK, BENGALURU 560 003
7. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARAPARK WEST,
T CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU 560 020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 27/01/2025 PASSED IN WP NO.16865/2022
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND TO
CONSEQUENTIALLY DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION.
IN WA NO. 1734/2025
BETWEEN:
- 35 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
1. MADHUSUDHAN CHIKKATURE RAJASHEKAR
SON OF CK RAJASHEKAR
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
2. SMT. SHANTHALA C M
WIFE OF MADHUSUDHAN CHIKATURE RAJASHEKAR
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SRI SHARVA,
1ST FLOOR, 7TH CROSS, A BLOCK,
NEAR ADHICHUNCHANGIRI SCHOOL,
SHIMOGA 577 201
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.N.PHANINDRA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. ABHINAY Y T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. H NAGARAJAIAH
SON OF HONAMARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT #175, 6TH STAGE,
III BLOCK, 30TH ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANA PALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU SOUTH 560 062
2. NAGARAJAPPA @ NAGARAJ
SON OF KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT NO. 43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
3. VAJRAPPA
SON OF HONMARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT NO. 43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062
- 36 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
4. SIDDAGANGAPPA
SON OF MARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
AND RESIDING AT NO. 109,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA, NEAR KABBHALAMMA
TEMPLE, TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU 560 062
5. STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR. BR AMBEDKAR BEEDI,
BENGLAURU 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
6. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
CHOWDIA ROAD, KUMARAPARK,
BENGALURU 560 003
7. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARAPARK WEST, T CHOWDALAH ROAD,
BENGALURU 560 020
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. JAYANT KUMAR SUD, SENIOR ADVOCATE AND
SRI. SAHIB KOCHHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. HANUMANTHARAYA.D, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 27.01.2025, PASSED IN WP No-16865/2022
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND TO
CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE WP IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN WA No. 419/2026
BETWEEN:
1. HAMSASHREE M R
W/O B G RAGHAVENDRA PRASAD,
- 37 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
ST
RESIDING AT #170, 1 CROSS,
ST RD
1 BLOCK BSK 3 PHASE,
RD
3 STAGE
NEAR JANATHA BAZAAR,
BENGALURU-560 085.
2. S. RAMANNA
S/O SIDDAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.35/1,
TH
5 CROSS,
TH
7 BLOCK
JAYANAGAR WEST,
ND
BSK 2 STAGE,
BENGALURU-560 070.
3. DEEPASHREE M.R.
W/O SHIVAPRAKASH C.L.,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
RESIDING AT #517/9,
TH
8 CROSS,
TH
7 BLOCK WEST
JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 070.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY K.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001,
REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.
2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARA PARK WEST,
- 38 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 020,
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
KUMARA PARK WEST,
T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 020.
4. H.NAGARAJAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
S/O HONAMARAPPA,
RESIDING AT #175,
ANUGRAHA,
TH
6 STAGE,
RD TH
3 BLOCK, 30 ROAD,
CHIKKAGOWDANAPALYA,
TALAGHATTAPURA POST,
BENGALURU-560 062.
5. NAGARAJAPPA @ NAGARAJ
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
S/O KARIYAPPA,
RESIDING AT #43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU-560 062.
6. VAJRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
S/O HONMARAPPA,
RESIDING AT #43,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU-560 062.
7. SIDDAGANGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
S/O MARAPPA,
- 39 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
RESIDING AT #109,
CHIKKEGOWDANAPALYA,
NEAR KABBHALAMMA TEMPLE,
TALAGHATTAPURA,
BENGALURU-560 062.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO: (a) CALL
FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN W.P.NO.16865/2022 AS THE
RESPONDENTS NO.4 TO 7 HAVE NOT ARRAYED THE
APPELLANTS HEREIN AS RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE; (b) SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
OF THE HONB'LE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED
27/01/2025 IN W.P.NO.16865/2022 AND CONSEQUENTLY
DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION IN W.P.NO.16865/2022
FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS NO.4 TO 7.
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR JUDGMENT ON 17.02.2026/24.02.2026, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
D K SINGH., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
- 40 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
1. W.A. No.606/2025 has been filed by the Bangalore
Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the
BDA' ) and W.A. Nos. 1123/2025, 1124/2025, 1136/2025,
1152/2025, 1157/2025, 1162/2025, 1163/2025,
1165/2025, 1182/2025, 1194/2025, 1225/2025,
1238/2025, 1273/2025, 1722/2025, 1734/2025 and 419/
2026 have been filed by the allottees impugning the
judgment and order dated 27.01.2025 passed by the writ
Court in W.P.No.16865/2022. The learned Single Judge
vide impugned judgment and order has allowed the writ
petition filed by the respondents herein/petitioners and
declared that the land acquisition proceedings initiated by
the State Government insofar as the lands bearing
Sy Nos.78/11, 78/12, 78/15, 78/16, 78/21, 94/9, 94/7,
94/14, 94/17, 94/18, 94/24, 97/1, 84 and 85 of
Hemmigepura Village, Kengeri, Bangalore South Taluk and
land bearing Sy.No.16/1 of Gankallu Village, Kengeri, are
- 41 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
bad in law as the respondent authorities had abandoned
the scheme of acquisition in respect of the subject lands in
question.
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking
before the writ Court.
FACTS:
3. A preliminary notification came to be issued on
15.11.2000 under the provisions of Section 17(1) of the
Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter
referred to as 'the BDA Act' ) for formation of
Banashankari VI Stage Layout comprising of 2,138 acres 4
guntas of land situated in 5 villages including the lands of
the petitioners, which is the subject matter of the dispute.
4. The Final Notification was issued on 21.08.2001 in
exercise of powers conferred under Section 19(1) of the
BDA Act for total extent of 1,598 acres 2 guntas including
the lands of the petitioners as mentioned above. The
award was passed in respect of the lands acquired by the
- 42 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
final notification including the lands in question on
18.10.2001.
5. The petitioners submitted a representation to the
State Government on 11.01.2002 for deletion of their
lands from the land acquisition proceedings.
6. The Commissioner, BDA, Bangalore submitted a
report to the Principal Secretary, Urban Development
Department, Government of Karnataka, stating therein,
that the award was passed in respect of the lands of the
petitioners, however, the said lands were not taken into
possession by the authorities.
7. After a period of 6 long years, the petitioners have
submitted a representation to the Chief Minister on
23.06.2008 seeking deletion of their lands from the land
acquisition proceedings.
8. The Chief Minister vide order dated 10.12.2010 had
ordered for dropping of the lands in question ad measuring
21.18 acres after 2 years and 4 months from the date of
- 43 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
representation. On the very same day, the Principal
Secretary, Urban Development Department made a note in
the file indicating that the possession of the lands was
taken by the BDA and the land acquisition was complete in
all respects and therefore, the Chief Minister was
requested to review the decision for deletion of the lands
from the acquisition proceedings, explaining the legal
hurdles.
9. The petitioners thereafter filed W.P.No.52299/2019
praying for following reliefs:-
"a. Declare that the preliminary Notification
dated 15.11.2000 under Section 17(1)
of the Bangalore Development Authority
Act, 1976 Gazetted on 01.12.2000 and
vide Annexure-A issued by the R-2 as
lapsed/abandoned in so far as schedule
properties.
b. Declare that the final Notification dated
21.08.2001 under Section 19 of the Act
vide Annexure-B Gazetted on
23.08.2001 issued by the R-1 as
lapsed/abandoned in so far as schedule
properties.
- 44 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
c. Direct the respondents herein to forbear
from acquiring the schedule land
situated Hemmigepura Village, Kengeri
Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, belonging
to the petitioner.
d. Direct the R-2 to issue NOC in respect
of the schedule lands by considering the
representation dated 25.11.2019 made
by the petitioner vide Annexure-J.
e. Direct the respondents to pay the cost
of these proceedings."
10. Thus, the petitioners in W.P. No.52299/2019 prayed
for declaration of Preliminary and Final Notifications dated
15.11.2000 and 21.08.2001 respectively as
lapsed/abandoned insofar as the lands in question were
concerned. While this writ petition was pending, the
petitioners again submitted a representation on
22.06.2022 to the State Government and the BDA for
deletion of their lands from the land acquisition
proceedings, and thereafter, they filed another
- 45 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
W.P.No.16865/2022 without disclosing the filing of earlier
W.P.No.52299/2019 with the following prayers:
"(a) Declare that, the acquisition
proceedings initiated by Respondent
No.2 as against the lands bearing
Sy.Nos.78/11, 78/12, 78/15, 78/16,
78/21, 94/9, 94/7, 94/14, 94/17,
94/18, 94/24, 97/1, 84, 85 in
Hemmigepura Village, Kengeri and
Sy.No.16/1 in Gankallu Village,
Kengeri, has lapsed, since Respondent
No.2 has failed to implement the
scheme. (Annexure 'A', Annexure
'B', Annexure 'D; and Annexure 'E')
(b) Declare that, the acquisition
proceedings initiated by Respondent
No.2 as against the lands bearing
Sy.Nos. 78/11, 78/12, 78/15, 78/16,
78/21, 94/9, 94/7, 94/14, 94/17,
94/18, 94/24, 97/1, 84, 85 in
Hemmigepura Village, Kengeri and Sy.
No.16/1 in Gankallu Village, Kengeri,
stand abandoned, since Respondent
No.2 has failed to take physical
possession of the schedule properties.
- 46 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
(Annexure 'A', Annexure'B',
Annexure 'D' and Annexure 'E')
(c) Declare that, the Respondents have
withdrawn lands bearing Sy.Nos. 78/11,
78/12, 78/15, 78/16, 78/21, 94/9,
94/7, 94/14, 94/17, 94/18, 94/24,
97/1, 84, 85 in Hemmigepura Village,
Kengeri and Sy. No.16/1 in Gankallu
Village, Kengeri from acquisition, by
virtue of the order passed by the
Hon'ble Chief Minister and
consequentially issue a direction to
respondent No.1 to give effect to the
said decision by causing the publication
of a formal notification as required
under Section 48 (1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (Annexure 'K')"
11. Thus, almost similar/identical prayers were made in
the subsequent petition i.e., W.P.No.16865/2022 without
disclosing about the filing of the earlier
W.P.No.52299/2019. In the subsequent writ petition, an
additional prayer was made for a direction to the
Government to give effect to the decision of the Chief
Minister by causing a publication of formal notification as
- 47 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
required under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894.
12. Out of the entire notified extent of land, 1,278 acres
has been utilised by the BDA for formation of the layout.
An extent of 370 acres 2 guntas has been utilised for
formation of the roads, 80 acres 22 guntas has been
utilized for formation of the park and open spaces and 88
acres 28 guntas has been utilized for civic amenities.
13. As per the records, the awards in respect of the
lands in question were passed between 08.11.2001 to
02.02.2002 and the possession was taken on different
dates and notification under Section 16(2) was issued on
08.05.2003. The date of award, date of possession in
respect of the lands in question is given hereunder:-
Sy. Nos. AWARD POSSESSION S.16(2)
NOTIFICATION
(PAGE 311)
78/11 08.11.2001 12.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.502)
78/12 08.11.2001 12.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.503)
08.11.2001 08.01.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.507)
78/15
78/16 12.11.2001 15.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.508)
78/21 08.11.2001 14.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.513)
94/7 15.12.2001 12.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.572)
94/9 12.11.2001 08.01.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.574)
94/14 07.12.2001 14.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.579)
- 48 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
94/17 07.12.2001 08.01.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.582)
94/18 15.12.2001 12.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.583)
94/24 08.11.2001 08.01.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.585)
97/1 15.11.2001 12.12.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.590)
84/1 02.11.2001 02.11.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.534)
84/2 02.11.2001 14.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.535)
85/p 04.12.2001 12.12.2001 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.536)
01.02.2002
16/1
16.02.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.28)
&
02.02.2002
14. The records would also disclose that the sites have
been formed in the lands in question which are as under:-
Sy.No. Sites formed
78/11 40x60 - sites
78/12 50x80 - 11 sites, 1 corner site
78/15 40x60 - 2 sites
50x80 - 6 sites
3 corner sites
78/16 30x40 - 2 sites
40x60 - 4 sites
50x80 - 11 sites
8 corner sites
5 Odd dimension sites
78/21 40x60 - 8 sites
50x80 - 1 site
1 corner site
- 49 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
94/14 40x60 - 2 sites
3 corner sites
94/17 40x60 - 5 sites
50x80 - 8 site
94/18 30x40 - 14 sites
40x60 - 2 site
50x80 - 6 sites
6 corner sites
97 30x40 - 31 sites
40x60 - 1 site
50x80 - 2 sites
5 Corner sites
84/1 40x60 - 40 sites
50x80 - 1 site
7 corner sites
84/2 30x40 - 23 sites
40x60 - 20 sites
50x80 - 11 sites
2 corner sites
85 30x40 - 6 sites
40x60 - 33 sites
- 50 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
50x80 - 18 sites
10 corner sites
16/1 20x30 - 52 sites
30x40 - 41 sites
40x60 - 28 sites
50x80 - 6 sites
28 corner sites
Odd dimension sites -11
94/9 50x80 - 1 site
1 corner site
94/7 40x60 - 13 sites
50x80 - 5 sites
12 Corner sites
15. The award amount in respect of the lands in
questions was deposited and the same had been accepted
by the landowners. Possession mahazars would disclose
that the possession of the lands in question was taken in
the presence of the independent witnesses, and the
witnesses had signed the mahazars drawn under Section
16 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- 51 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
FINDINGS OF THE WRIT COURT:
16. The learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment
has held that the BDA/the appellant herein has failed to
establish that the actual physical possession of the lands
had been taken, for which the learned Single Judge has
heavily placed reliance on the letter dated 23.01.2002
written by the Commissioner, BDA and had discarded the
mahazers as unreliable being in printed format, lacking
details such as identification of the witnesses etc. The
learned Single Judge has also placed reliance on the
revenue entries to come to the conclusion that the
petitioners have been in continuous possession of the
lands, and the lands have not been utilized for the
purposes of the scheme. The learned Single Judge
therefore, concluded that the BDA's letter dated
23.01.2002 and the revenue entries would disclose that
the authorities have not implemented the scheme for over
more than 2 decades and thus the scheme has lapsed as
provided under Section 27 of the BDA Act.
- 52 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
17. In respect of not disclosing of filing of the earlier
W.P.No.52299/2019, the learned Single Judge has
brushed aside the objection and has held that in view of
not taking possession of the lands in question, the filing of
the earlier writ petition and its withdrawal would not come
on the way of declaring the land acquisition proceedings in
respect of the lands in question as lapsed, whereas the
possession has not been taken for more than 24 years.
SUBMISSIONS:
18. Sri G.S. Kannur, learned Senior Counsel assisted by
Sri Murgesh V. Charati, learned counsel for the appellants
and Sri. Mohamad Jaffar Shah, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the State, would
submit that the writ petition ought to have been dismissed
on the preliminary issue itself, i.e., non disclosure of filing
of W.P.No.52299/2019 wherein almost identical prayers
were made as noted above and its dismissal as withdrawn
vide order dated 06.02.2024 without the liberty to file
- 53 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
afresh or prosecute W.P. No.16865/2022. The order dated
06.02.2024 would read as under:
" ORDER
1. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the Writ Petition may be dismissed as
withdrawn.
2.His submission is placed on record.
3.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is hereby
dismissed as withdrawn."
19. It may be noted that the petitioner did not bring to the
notice of the learned Single Judge, the pendency of subsequent
W.P. No. 16865/2022 while making submission to withdraw the
writ petition which is evident from the above said order.
20. The learned Single Judge has brushed aside this
preliminary objection of non-disclosure of filing of earlier
writ petition on untenable ground. The subsequent writ
petition was nothing but a result of Bench hunting as
W.P.No.52299/2019 was pending before another learned
Single Judge and the petitioner realized that he would not
get a favourable order from the said Court. The land
- 54 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
acquisition was complete in all respects in the year 2002.
The first writ petition came to be filed in the year 2019
i.e., after 21 long years and second writ petition was filed
in the year 2022. This belated challenge to the land
acquisition proceedings ought not to have been
entertained on any ground. One letter of the
Commissioner, BDA, in 2002 would not give a cause of
action to the petitioners to challenge the land acquisition
proceedings after lapse of 21 years, wherein they had
accepted the award and the scheme had been
implemented substantially as is evident from the fact that
the BDA had formed sites and large scale development has
taken place. The BDA has allotted the sites to its allottees
and has executed the sale deeds in their favour from the
year 2002 itself and most of the allottees have constructed
their houses. The formation of the roads, sites and other
amenities are evident from the photographs produced in
the connected writ appeals. The learned Senior Counsel
has placed reliance on INDORE DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY VS. MANOHARLAL AND OTHERS [(2020) 8
- 55 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
SCC 129] to buttress his arguments that the writ petition
filed after the lapse of 21 years from the date of issuance
of final notification should not have been entertained.
20. It has been further submitted that the learned
Single Judge was not justified in coming to the conclusion
that possession of the properties have not been taken only
on the basis of a letter written by the Commissioner, BDA
in the year 2002 and since the revenue entries stood in
the name of the petitioners in the year 2022-2023. It is
further submitted that the landowners themselves have
contended that out of 41.18 acres of their land, physical
possession of 20 acres was taken as they had voluntarily
given up for compensation. It would be beyond
comprehension that when the possession is purported to
have been taken of the entire acquired land, the actual
possession would be taken only of a portion of the lands.
21. The certificate of possession i.e., mahazars would be
either correct or incorrect, it cannot be partially correct or
partially incorrect. Either the possession had actually been
- 56 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
delivered or had not been delivered, it cannot be accepted
that the possession had been delivered in respect of 20
acres of the land and the possession could not be taken of
in respect of the remaining 21.18 acres of the land. The
lawful possession of entire extent of lands had already
been taken and mere existence of names of the petitioners
in the revenue records would not be evidenced to suggest
that possession was not taken. Once the possession was
taken and the notification under Section 16(2) of the Land
Acquisition Act was issued, the acquired land stood vested
absolutely in the State and the BDA free from all
encumbrances. Such vesting was complete and irrevocable
in the nature and therefore, the letter of the
Commissioner, BDA or the order issued by the Chief
Minister, which was sought to be reviewed on the same
day, without a formal notification under Section 48 of the
Land Acquisition Act, would not amount to abandoning the
land acquisition proceedings or lapsing of the scheme
when the scheme has been substantially implemented as
mentioned above. The petitioners cannot claim right to
- 57 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
equality after 21 years, if some lands were deleted in
pursuance to the judicial orders passed and the same
would not automatically entitle the petitioners to the relief
that too after 21 years from the date of the final
notification and passing of the award and vesting of the
lands in the State and its Authorities.
22. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondents/petitioners has reiterated the submissions
advanced before the learned Single Judge and have
supported the impugned judgment.
QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION:
23. The following questions arise for our consideration:-
(i) Whether the W.P.No.16865/2022 was
maintainable in view of the filing of the earlier
W.P.No.52299/2019 and its non disclosure and its
withdrawal vide order dated 06.02.2024 without
liberty to file a fresh writ petition or prosecute the
subsequent Writ Petition No.16865/2022?
- 58 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
(ii) Whether the W.P.No.16865/2022 suffered from
gross delay and latches in challenging the land
acquisition proceedings after inordinate delay and
lapse of 21 years from the date of the final
notification?
(iii) Whether when the Collector has made the award
under Section 11 and Section 16(2) notification has
been issued and the land vested absolutely in the
Government/Authority free from all encumbrances,
can it be released without there being a notification
under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894?
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION:
Re. Question No.(i) :
24. While W.P.No.52299/2019 was pending for
consideration before a different learned Single Judge of
this Court, the petitioners had filed W.P.No.16865/2022
without disclosing the pending W.P.No.52299/2019. As the
- 59 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
matter was pertaining to the year 2022, the subsequent
writ petition was cognizable before another Single Bench.
When the petitioners could gather that they would not get
the desired relief in W.P.No.52299/2019, the petitioners
filed the subsequent W.P.No.16865/2022 which came
before another Bench without disclosing the filing of the
earlier writ petition, not even whisper was made in the
subsequent writ petition regarding the filing of the earlier
W.P.No.52299/2019. This tactic adopted by the petitioners
was nothing but a Bench hunting, forum shopping and an
abuse of the process of the Court. The earlier
W.P.No.52299/2019 was dismissed as withdrawn without
any liberty to prosecute the subsequent writ petition and
therefore, the subsequent writ petition ought to have been
dismissed with heavy costs. However, the learned Single
Judge has casually brushed aside, this objection of filing of
the subsequent writ petition without disclosing the filing of
earlier writ petition and its withdrawal.
- 60 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
25. We are of the considered view, that filing of the
subsequent writ petition was nothing but a gross abuse of
the process of the Court and the subsequent writ petition
was not maintainable for the identical or similar relief and
this was a Bench hunting practiced by the petitioners to
get the desired/favourable relief from another Bench.
Re. Question No.(ii) :
26. The second writ petition filed by the petitioners was
after 21 long years from the date of the final notification
as mentioned above. The award in respect of the lands in
question was passed on different dates i.e. from
08.11.2001 to 02.02.2002 and the possession was taken
on different dates from 12.12.2001 to 16.02.2002 and the
notification under Section 16(2) of the Land Acquisition Act
came to be issued on 08.05.2003 in respect of the lands in
question. Once the Collector makes an award under
Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, and the possession
is taken, the lands vest absolutely in the Government free
from all encumbrances. Once the possession is taken, the
- 61 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
title get transferred to the State, and the lands cannot be
unvested except under specific circumstances, such as
Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013.
STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANOTHER VS.
27. In the
MAHALAKSHMI AMMAL AND OTHERS [( 1996) SCC 7
269] and INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS.
MANOHARLAL AND OTHERS [(2020) 8 SCC 129] it has
been held that the mode of taking possession depends on
the nature of the land. If it is open land for large tracts of
vacant or agricultural land, it is physically impossible for
the State to occupy every inch. In such cases the
execution of Panchanama (mahazar) signed by the
witnesses on-site is considered as valid and legal
possession. If the State records taking of possession in
official documents (the possession memo/mahazar) and
performance of symbolic acts like beating drums or
planting flags, the land is deemed to have been vested.
- 62 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
Deemed possession refers to a legal term where the law
treats possession as having been taken even if the
erstwhile owner remains on property as a trespasser or
licensee. Once panchanama is drawn, the original owner's
legal possession ends. Any continued possession/stay by
the owner is considered permissive possession or
unauthorised occupation. It does not prevent the lawful
'vesting' from occurring. The mahazar drawn is a primary
piece of evidence of possession being taken by the
authority. Publication of Section 16(2) notification
indicates that the authority claims to have taken
possession and the land has vested in the State/Acquiring
authority free from all encumbrances.
28. In the present case, the award was passed and the
compensation was taken by the petitioners and therefore,
it would indicate that the petitioner's possession of the
lands was nothing but trespass. As mentioned above the
layouts have been formed, roads have been constructed
- 63 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
and substantial development of the scheme has been
implemented.
29. The learned Single Judge has placed reliance on the
letter dated 23.01.2002 addressed by the Commissioner,
BDA to the Principal Secretary of the State Government.
However, the BDA subsequently by the notification under
Section 16(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated
08.05.2003 proceeded to take possession of the subject
lands. Mahazars were drawn, the awards were passed,
and compensation was paid to the petitioners. In view of
the aforesaid, filing of the writ petition after 21 years from
the date of the final notification suffered from gross delay
and latches, and ought to have been dismissed.
Re. Question No.(iii) :
30. The land acquisition proceedings can be withdrawn
under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, only
before the possession has been taken. Once the
possession has been taken and title vests in the State or
its authority under Section 16, withdrawal under Section
- 64 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
48 is impermissible. In such cases the ownership cannot
be divested and the owner is only entitled for
compensation.
31. The power to withdraw the land from the land
acquisition proceedings under Section 48 of the Land
Acquisition Act, is available before taking of possession by
the State. Where the land acquisition stood concluded, no
claims in that regard can be entertained and agitated as
they would not get revived. The Supreme Court in
INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ( supra ) in
paragraph 356, it has held as under:-
" 356. We are of the opinion that courts cannot
invalidate acquisitions, which stood concluded. No
claims in that regard can be entertained and
agitated as they have not been revived. There has
to be legal certainty where infrastructure has been
created or has been developed partially, and
investments have been made, especially when land
has been acquired long back. It is the duty of the
Court to preserve the legal certainty, as observed in
Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India
[Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of
- 65 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
India, (2012) 6 SCC 613 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 867]
. The landowners had urged that since the 2013 Act
creates new situations, which are beneficial to their
interests, the question of delay or laches does not
arise. This Court is of the opinion that the said
contention is without merits. As held earlier, the
doctrine of laches would always preclude an indolent
party, who chooses not to approach the court, or
having approached the court, allows an adverse
decision to become final, to reagitate the issue of
acquisition of his holding. Doing so, especially in
cases, where the title has vested with the State, and
thereafter with subsequent interests, would be
contrary to public policy. In A.P. State Financial
Corpn. v. Gar Re-Rolling Mills [A.P. State Financial
Corpn. v. Gar Re-Rolling Mills, (1994) 2 SCC 647] ,
this Court observed that equity is always known to
defend the law from crafty evasions and new
subtleties invented to evade the law. There is no
dearth of talent left in longing for the undue
advantage of the wholesome provisions of Section
24(2) on the basis of wrong interpretation."
32. When the large extent of land was acquired and the
BDA has implemented the scheme substantially, the
findings of the learned Single Judge that the lands of the
petitioners had not been taken possession of, by the BDA
- 66 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
does not appear to be correct. There cannot be a partial
taking over of possession when the landowners
themselves have admitted that possession of over 20
acres of lands was handed over to the authority, their
contention that possession of 21.18 acres was not taken,
which is the subject matter of the writ petition does not
appear to be correct.
33. In paragraph Nos.261, 262 and 264 of the INDORE
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ( supra ), the Constitution
Bench has held as under:-
" 261. Now, the Court would examine the mode of
taking possession under the 1894 Act as laid down
by this Court. In Balwant Narayan Bhagde [Balwant
Narayan Bhagde v. M.D. Bhagwat, (1976) 1 SCC
700] it was observed that the act of Tahsildar in
going on the spot and inspecting the land was
sufficient to constitute taking of possession.
Thereafter, it would not be open to the Government
or the Commission to withdraw from the acquisition
under Section 48(1) of the Act. It was held thus :
(SCC pp. 711-12, para 28)
- 67 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
“28. We agree with the conclusion reached by our
Brother Untwalia, J., as also with the reasoning on
which the conclusion is based. But we are writing a
separate judgment as we feel that the discussion in
the judgment of our learned Brother Untwalia, J., in
regard to delivery of “symbolical” and “actual”
possession under Rules 35, 36, 95 and 96 of Order
21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is not necessary
for the disposal of the present appeals and we do
not wish to subscribe to what has been said by our
learned Brother Untwalia, J., in that connection, nor
do we wish to express our assent with the
discussion of the various authorities made by him in
his judgment. We think it is enough to state that
when the Government proceeds to take possession
of the land acquired by it under the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894, it must take actual possession of the
land, since all interests in the land are sought to be
acquired by it. There can be no question of taking
“symbolical” possession in the sense understood by
judicial decisions under the Code of Civil Procedure.
Nor would possession merely on paper be enough.
What the Act contemplates as a necessary condition
of vesting of the land in the Government is the
taking of actual possession of the land. How such
possession may be taken would depend on the
nature of the land. Such possession would have to
be taken as the nature of the land admits of. There
- 68 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
can be no hard-and-fast rule laying down what act
would be sufficient to constitute taking of possession
of land. We should not, therefore, be taken as laying
down an absolute and inviolable rule that merely
going on the spot and making a declaration by beat
of drum or otherwise would be sufficient to
constitute taking of possession of land in every
case. But here, in our opinion, since the land was
lying fallow and there was no crop on it at the
material time, the act of the Tahsildar in going on
the spot and inspecting the land for the purpose of
determining what part was waste and arable and
should, therefore, be taken possession of and
determining its extent, was sufficient to constitute
taking of possession. It appears that the appellant
was not present when this was done by the
Tahsildar, but the presence of the owner or the
occupant of the land is not necessary to effectuate
the taking of possession. It is also not strictly
necessary as a matter of legal requirement that
notice should be given to the owner or the occupant
of the land that possession would be taken at a
particular time, though it may be desirable where
possible, to give such notice before possession is
taken by the authorities, as that would eliminate the
possibility of any fraudulent or collusive transaction
of taking of mere paper possession, without the
occupant or the owner ever coming to know of it.”
- 69 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
262. In T.N. Housing Board v. A. Viswam [T.N.
Housing Board v. A. Viswam, (1996) 8 SCC 259] it
was held that drawing of panchnama in the
presence of witnesses would constitute a mode of
taking possession. This Court observed : (SCC p.
262, para 9)
“9. It is settled law by series of judgments of this
Court that one of the accepted modes of taking
possession of the acquired land is recording of a
memorandum or panchnama by the LAO in the
presence of witnesses signed by him/them and that
would constitute taking possession of the land as it
would be impossible to take physical possession of
the acquired land. It is common knowledge that in
some cases the owner/interested person may not
cooperate in taking possession of the land.”
(emphasis supplied)
264. In State of T.N. v. Mahalakshmi Ammal [State
of T.N. v. Mahalakshmi Ammal, (1996) 7 SCC 269] ,
this Court dealt with the effect of vesting on
possession and mode of taking it and opined thus :
(SCC p. 272, para 9)
“9. It is well-settled law that publication of the
declaration under Section 6 gives conclusiveness to
public purpose. Award was made on 26-9-1986 and
for Survey No. 2/11 award was made on 31-8-1990.
- 70 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
Possession having already been undertaken on 24-
11-1981, it stands vested in the State under Section
16 of the Act free from all encumbrances and
thereby the Government acquired absolute title to
the land. The initial award having been made within
two years under Section 11 of the Act, the fact that
subsequent award was made on 31-8-1990 does not
render the initial award invalid. It is also to be seen
that there is stay of dispossession. Once there is
stay of dispossession, all further proceedings
necessarily could not be proceeded with as laid
down by this Court. Therefore, the limitation also
does not stand as an impediment as provided in the
proviso to Section 11-A of the Act. Equally, even if
there is an irregularity in service of notice under
Sections 9 and 10, it would be a curable irregularity
and on account thereof, award made under Section
11 does not become invalid. Award is only an offer
on behalf of the State. If compensation was
accepted without protest, it binds such party but
subject to Section 28-A. Possession of the acquired
land would be taken only by way of a memorandum,
panchnama, which is a legally accepted norm. It
would not be possible to take any physical
possession. Therefore, subsequent continuation, if
any, had by the erstwhile owner is only illegal or
unlawful possession which does not bind the
Government nor vested under Section 16 divested
- 71 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
in the illegal occupant. Considered from this
perspective, we hold that the High Court was not
justified in interfering with the award.”
34. The finding of the learned Single Judge that the
acquisition proceedings in respect of the Banashankari VI
stage had lapsed insofar as the petitioners' land is
concerned is absolutely incorrect. The preliminary
notification was issued for 2,138 acres 4 guntas, whereas
the Government had approved the scheme for 1,598 acres
2 guntas. The petitioners themselves have admitted in the
writ petition that the possession of 1,203 acres 18.5
guntas was taken by the BDA and thus, there cannot be
partial taking of the possession. The Learned Single Judge
has ignored the vital aspect of development and formation
of the sites, roads, parks, public amenities and substantial
implementation of the scheme. Once the land got vested
in the State/Authority, free from all encumbrances, there
was no question of quashing of the land acquisition by the
writ Court particularly, in subsequent writ petition which
was nothing but a gross abuse of the process of the Court.
- 72 -
WA No. 606 of 2025
C/W WA No. 1123 of 2025
WA No. 1124 of 2025
AND 14 OTHERS
35. Thus, we allow these appeals filed by the BDA and
the allottees and set aside impugned judgment and order
dated 27.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge. In
the result the W.P.No.16865/2022 stands dismissed with
exemplary cost of Rs. 50,000/- to be paid to the Armed
Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within four weeks
from today. We have imposed this cost for playing fraud
and grossly abusing the process of the Court.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
NG