- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11732 WP No. 13124 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 13124 OF 2024 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: SRI. ADINARYANASWAMY S/O SRI ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT NO 22, 4TH MAIN ROAD 4TH CROSS, SSA ROAD SRUSTI APARTMENT, HEBBALA H A FARM, BANGALORE NORTH BANGALORE 560024 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G S VENKAT SUBBA RAO.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE 560020 2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY I BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE 560020 Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA LAXMI YASHODA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11732 WP No. 13124 of 2024 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMAR PARK WEST BANGALORE 560020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AJAYKUMAR M., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER OF ALLOTMENT DTD 19.03.24 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE DEMAND MADE FOR ALLOTMENT OF SITE IN A SUM OF RS. 63,79,613/- ISSUED BY DEPUTY SECRETARY-I, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE- 560020, I.E R2 HEREIN, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The grievance of the petitioner is directed towards the impugned demand notices issued by the respondent - Bangalore Development Authority calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount demanded towards allotment of 3 sites in terms of the Rule 4 of Bangalore Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11732 WP No. 13124 of 2024 Land) Rules, 1989. However, it is pointed out from Annexure-J pertaining to another landlord pertaining to the same acquisition that the amount demanded in the year 2017 is Rs.9,600/- for a site measuring 112.8 sq. meters. Learned counsel submits that similar value has to be fixed at the same rate as was done in the case of Smt. Kaveramma. Learned counsel would also draw the attention of this Court to the order passed in W.P.No.2732/2020 dated 05.02.2020 in the case of Sri Rangaswamy and others /vs./ Bangalore Development Authority, where similar directions have been issued by this Court to consider fixation of the value and the amount payable, having regard to the rate fixed in respect of the neighbouring land owners or similarly placed applicants. 2. There is substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. If the Bangalore Development Authority has fixed a certain rate for allotment of an incentive site in terms of the provisions of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11732 WP No. 13124 of 2024 the Rules, there cannot be any discrimination in fixation of the rates. The petitioner is entitled for seeking fixation of the value as was done in the case of the neighboring landowner or an applicant similarly placed in respect of the acquisition notification applicable to similarly placed parties. 3. Consequently, the impugned demand notices at Annexures-A, B and C are quashed, while directing the respondent – Bangalore Development Authority to reconsider the fixation of the sital value taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner had voluntarily surrendered his lands and as per the scheme and the rules applicable, sites are required to be allotted to the petitioner at the rate fixed to similarly placed persons. However, if there is any excess allotment beyond the entitlement in terms of the Rules, the petitioner is liable to pay the market value and not in terms of the value to be fixed under the Rules, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11732 WP No. 13124 of 2024 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, while directing the respondent – Bangalore Development Authority to refix the sital value, inform the petitioner and the petitioner shall pay the value accordingly. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL