- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:932 WP No. 426 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 426 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: SRI. R. SOMASHEKAR REDDY S/O LATE RAMALAH REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO. 10, 18TH A CROSS, 8TH MAIN, PUSHPALAYOUT, N.S PALYA, B.T.M, B.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARNAV A BAGALWADI.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. 3. THE SECRETARY BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU -560 020. Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:932 WP No. 426 of 2025 4. ENGINEER OFFICE-III, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN THE MATTER FORTHWITH IN TERMS OF THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 14.11.2024 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G RESPECTIVELY AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner who claims to be the owner of a property situated at 16th main road, Rashtrakavi Kuvempu Nagara, Nayanapannashetty Palya village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore District is before this Court seeking direction to the respondent No.2-BDA to have the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:932 WP No. 426 of 2025 alleged unauthorised occupants vacated from a property situated opposite to his property. 2. On a query by this Court as to the locus-standi of the petitioner to maintain this petition since admittedly petitioner does not have any personal regret or interest in the property so allegedly occupied and since the alleged unauthorized occupants have not ever been made parties to this petition, learned counsel refers to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sri.K. Ramadas Shenoy vs. The Chief Officers, Town Municipal Council, Udupi and others and however fairly submits that the facts of the said matter are different from the facts of the matter at hand. He adds that since the respondent-BDA owes a statutory obligation to keep the locality clean, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. Thus, after arguing the matter for some time , learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:932 WP No. 426 of 2025 withdraw the writ petition with liberty to seek such remedy as may be available under law. In that view of the matter, petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34