- 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 DATED THIS THE 3rd 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) 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 ® Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 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, 1ST 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, R/AT NO.3142, 7TH 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, 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, - 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 NO.27/A, 1ST MAIN, 1ST 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, "HARITHASA", 1ST CROSS, 3RD MAIN ROAD, BANASHANKARI 3RD 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, 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, - 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 ORDER DATED 27TH 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, JAYANAGAR, 4TH 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, I BLOCK, HAL 3RD 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, RESIDING AT #170, 1ST CROSS, 1ST BLOCK BSK 3RD PHASE, 3RD STAGE NEAR JANATHA BAZAAR, BENGALURU-560 085. 2. S. RAMANNA S/O SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.35/1, 5TH CROSS, 7TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR WEST, BSK 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 070. 3. DEEPASHREE M.R. W/O SHIVAPRAKASH C.L., AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT #517/9, 8TH CROSS, 7TH 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, 6TH STAGE, 3RD BLOCK, 30TH 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) 78/15 08.11.2001 08.01.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.507) 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) 16/1 01.02.2002 & 02.02.2002 16.02.2002 08.05.2003 (Sl.No.28) 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 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. 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 - 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. 27. In the STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANOTHER VS. 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