- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 26008 OF 2024 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAMANARAYAN S/O SADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT GANAKALLU VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK - 560 060. 2. SRI. M. MUNIKRISHNA, S/O LATE MURARI, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT GANAKALLU VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK - 560 060. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.N.PHANINDRA, SR. COUNSEL FOR 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. Digitally signed by ROOPA R U Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA AGA FOR R1; SRI. AJAYKUMAR M., ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08.04.2024 AT ANNEXURE-K AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOT THE PETITIONER 50% DEVELOPED LANDS IN THE SAME LAYOUT (11979 SQ FT PER ACRE) IN RESPECT OF LANDS IN LAND MEASURING 8 ACRES IN SY NO. 13 (OLD) NEW SY NO. 13/1B OF GANAKALLU VILLAGE, KENGERI, HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK IN TERMS OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 09.10.2018. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioners are before this Court for a direction to the respondent No.3 to consider the representation dated 08.04.2024 as per Annexure-K and consequently to allot them 50% of the developed land in the same layout in respect of the land measuring 8 acres in Sy.No.13 (old) New No.13/1B of Ganakallu village, Kengeri Hobli, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 Bengaluru South Taluk in terms of the Government Order dated 09.10.2018. 2. Sri. K.N.Phanindra, learned Senior counsel appearing for the counsel for the petitioners taking this Court through documents, more particularly, the earlier orders dated 08.07.2011 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.21552/2011 and connected matters as well as the order dated 15.07.2019 passed in W.P.No.63031/2016 and W.P.No.63032/2016, submits that despite specific direction by this Court on two occasions directing the respondent No.3 to consider the case of the petitioners, the respondent has neither passed any order nor has issued any endorsement. On the other hand has again referred the matter to the Tahsildar who is an adversarial claimant of the petitioners right. Thus, he submits that the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court for the third time. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent -BDA files statement of objections along with documents and submits - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 that the lands in Sy.No.13/1B which is being claimed by the petitioners are notified as the Government land. He submits that the revenue records upto the year 1984-85 reflect the said lands to be the Government lands and that after a thorough enquiry into the matter an endorsement dated 09.09.2021 as per Annexure-R15 has been issued providing detailed reasoning as to why the respondent No.3 is not in a position to determine and disburse the compensation in favour of the petitioners. He submits that untill and unless the petitioners establish their right in an appropriately constituted proceedings, the respondent No.3 is unable to disburse the amount. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent -BDA hasten to add that in the instant case the respondent -BDA be permitted to deposit the amount before the competent court and petitioners be directed to obtain appropriate orders enabling the respondent No.3 to proceed further in accordance with law. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in response submits that since the dispute is sought to be made out with regard to title of the property, the respondent No.3 be directed to make reference of the matter to the competent court for determination of the claims of the parties. He further submits that another apprehension of the petitioners is that in such an event the petitioners may lose out their entitlement to seek developed portion of the land as provided under the scheme, and therefore a provisions be made in that regard. 6. Submission is taken on record. 7. Heard. Perused the records. 8. As seen above, the issue involved in the matter is with regard to the right, title interest of the petitioners in respect of the portion of land acquired by the respondent -BDA which according to the petitioners was a granted land. While according to the respondent No.3 it is a Government land as per revenue records. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 9. That apart, the dispute is also being one with regard to the apportionment of the compensation. In terms of provisions of Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 matter requires to be referred to the Competent Court for determination of claims of the parties, which is also competent to determine the entitlement of parties. 10. Since the respondent No.3 has sought for such a liberty and the petitioners have no objection for the same, petition is disposed of with the following directions; (a) Respondent No.3 shall refer the matter to the Competent Court within a period of thirty (30) days from the date receipt of certified copy of this order. (b) Petitioners are at liberty to seek adjudication of their entitlement over the acquired property/compensation and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:1268 WP No. 26008 of 2024 thereafter stake a claim before the respondent No.3 for compensation. (c) Petitioners are also at liberty to seek allotment of developed area if permissible under scheme or law. (d) To avoid any further uncertainty the respondent-BDA may also communicate to the petitioners regarding the reference made as directed hereinabove. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51