K VIDYASHANKAR vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT APPEAL NO.2200 OF 2026 (BDA)
BETWEEN:
K. VIDYASHANKAR
S/O LATE B. KRISHNASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
SENIOR JOURNALIST,
TH
R/AT 18, 10 CROSS, NR COLONY,
BENGALURU - 560028.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM HUILGOL, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. CHETHAN A.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560020.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (EAST),
BDA EAST DIVISION,
HSR LAYOUT BDA COMPLEX,
BENGALURU - 560102.
Digitally signed
by C K LATHA
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
4. THE ENGINEERING MEMBER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560020.
5. THE FINANCE MEMBER,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560020.
6. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY-1,
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560020.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKAR, AGA, FOR R-1)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS
APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.06.2026 IN
W.P.NO.26539/2025 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE
APPELLANT HEREIN; ALLOW W.P.NO.26539/2025 AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA )
1. For the reasons stated in the application - I..A.No.1/2026, the
same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
2. The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice
for respondent No.1.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
3. This intra-Court appeal is preferred by the appellant, who
was the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 26539/2025 [BDA], assailing
the order dated 12.06.2026 [ impugned order ] passed by the
learned Single Judge, whereby the Writ Petition filed by the
appellant seeking quashing of the auction notification issued by the
Bangalore Development Authority [ BDA ] insofar as it pertains to
site No.304/A measuring 12.19 x 18.00 metres situated at Agara
Village, HSR Layout 4th Sector, Bengaluru, shown as item No.2 in
the auction notification published in Times of India, Bengaluru
Edition dated 17.08.2025 came to be rejected. However, liberty
was reserved to the appellant to take possession of site No.B7-SF-
3240 measuring 12.00 x 18.00 metres allotted by BDA in
Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout.
BRIEF FACTS
4. The appellant is a senior journalist. It is his case that, in
recognition of his services, the BDA allotted him site under the "G"
category and executed a lease-cum-sale agreement dated
16.07.2011, agreeing to convey site No.1017 situated in HSR
layout, 6th Sector Bengaluru. However, as the said site was subject
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
matter of litigation, the appellant could not take possession thereof.
Consequently, he submitted a representation dated 08.08.2024
requesting the BDA to allot site No.304/A situated in HSR Layout
4th Sector as an alternative site. Since the said representation was
not considered, the appellant approached this Court in Writ Petition
No.11456/2025. This Court by order dated 22.04.2025 directed the
BDA to consider the representation dated 08.08.2024 seeking
allotment of an alternative site and to communicate the result of
such consideration to the appellant within the stipulated period. As
the direction was allegedly not complied with, the appellant initiated
contempt proceedings in CCC No.1089/2025.
5. In the meanwhile, the BDA proposed to auction various sites,
including site No.304/A situated in HSR Layout 4th Sector, which
was the very site sought by the appellant in his representation.
Aggrieved by the inclusion of the said site in the auction notification
dated 17.08.2025, the appellant approached this Court seeking for
quashing of the auction notification insofar as it related to site
No.304/A.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
CONTENTIONS
6. Sri Vikram Huilgol, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the appellant, contended that the appellant had specifically
requested allotment of site No.304/A in HSR Layout 4th Sector as
an alternative site in lieu of site No.1017, which had been allotted
to him earlier but of which he could not take possession owing to
pending litigation. It was contended that BDA was under a bounden
duty to consider the appellant's representation and indicate the
reason as to why site No.304/A could not be allotted to him as an
alternative site. It is further contended that with a view of defeating
the legitimate claim of the appellant, the BDA has proceeded to
include the very same site in the auction notification. Therefore, he
contends that the learned Single Judge ought to have interfered
with the auction notification.
IMPUGNED ORDER
7. The learned Single Judge held that the appellant had no
vested right to seek allotment of a particular site of his choice as
the allotment of an alternative site was a policy decision falling
within the domain of the BDA. It was also noticed that the sites
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
under the 'G' category was allotted out of turn in recognition of the
services rendered by the citizens to society at large. The BDA,
having found that the appellant could not take possession of the
site originally allotted to him, had made amends by allotting another
site of similar dimension in Nadaprabhu Kempegowda layout.
Accordingly, the learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the
auction notification and disposed of the writ petition, leaving it open
to the appellant to take possession of the alternate site allotted by
the BDA.
REASONS AND CONCLUSION
8. It is undisputed that the appellant was initially allotted site
No.1017 in HSR layout 6 sector under the 'G' category and he
could not take possession of the said site owing to the pending
litigation. It is also not in dispute that the BDA has subsequently
allotted site No.B7-SF-3240 measuring 12.00 x 18.00 metres
situated in Nadaprabhu Kempegowda layout as an alternative site.
The principal grievance of the appellant is that BDA ought to have
allotted site No.304/A as specifically sought by him in his
representation dated 08.08.2024 instead of proceeding to auction
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
the said site. However, merely because the appellant had identified
and sought allotment of a particular site, no vested or enforceable
right accrues to him to insist upon the allotment of that very site.
The identification and allotment of an alternative site is a matter
falling within the domain of BDA subject to the applicable statutory
provisions and rules.
9. As rightly held by the learned Single Judge, the appellant
cannot claim as a matter of right, allotment of a particular site of his
choice. The BDA having taken note of the fact that the appellant
could not take possession of the site originally allotted to him, has
already allotted an alternative site of similar dimensions in
Nadaprabhu Kempegowda layout. In such circumstances, the
appellant can neither insist that site No.304/A in HSR layout, 4th
sector alone should be allotted to him nor can the auction
notification relating to the said site be interfered with merely on that
ground. We are therefore of the considered view that the learned
Single Judge has rightly declined to interfere with the auction
notification issued by the BDA. We find no merit in the contentions
urged by the appellant warranting any interference in this intra-
Court appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60266-DB
WA No. 2200 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010660662026
10. The pending interlocutory application stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(VIBHU BAKHRU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(K.S. HEMALEKHA)
JUDGE
CKL
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6