- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14933 WP No. 36326 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 36326 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. M/S JAKKUR VIEWS DEVELOPERS PVT LIMITED (INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 2013) NO. 84, ULSOOR MAIN ROAD SIVAN CHETTY GARDEN BENGALURU - 560 042 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI RISHAD KHERGAMWALA … PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI B. NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. VIJETHA R NAIK., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002 2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002 3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING (NORTH) BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002 … RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14933 WP No. 36326 of 2024 (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-3 DTD. 21.11.2024 NO.PRJ/8853/24-25 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-K AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER Petitioner has filed the present petition seeking for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the endorsement issued by respondent No.3 at Annexure-K dated 21.11.2024. 2. In terms of the endorsement at Annexure-K, the application of the petitioner for revised plan has been rejected while observing that the lands in which the petitioner is seeking permission for development by modification of the plan for Sy. Nos. 18/1, 18/6-B and 18/7 of Jakkur Village, Yelahanka, Bangalore, would fall - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14933 WP No. 36326 of 2024 within the ambit of proceedings pending before Justice Sri. K.N.Keshavanarayana's Committee. 3. It is the case of Sri. Ravi B. Naik, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the only reason assigned is that in light of the proceedings before the Committee referred to above, No Objection Certificate must be obtained from the BDA as well as from the Committee. It is submitted that insofar as such observation is concerned, in terms of Annexures-L1 to L3, the endorsement by the BDA would indicate that the lands in Sy. No. 18/1 measuring 23 guntas, Sy. No. 18/6-B measuring 23 guntas and Sy. No. 18/7 measuring 2 acres 11 guntas are all outside the purview of acquisition by the BDA insofar as Arkavathy Layout. 4. Perused Annexures-L1 to L3. Prima facie the lands with respect to which permission has been sought fall outside the purview of any acquisition by the BDA as is evident from the endorsements at Annexures-L1 to L3. The said aspect is not controverted by the other side. If - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14933 WP No. 36326 of 2024 that were to be so, endorsement at Annexure-K has to be set aside on the ground that the question of approaching Justice Sri. K.N.Keshavanarayana Committee and obtaining necessary clarification from the said Committee would not arise in light of Annexures-L1 to L3. 5. Accordingly, the endorsement at Annexure-K is set aside. The application of the petitioner for revised sanction plan to be reconsidered within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Needless to state the petitioner to clarify and furnish documents as may be required to enable consideration of their pending proposal. SD/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP