- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32804-DB WP No. 4559 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA WRIT PETITION NO. 4559 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: MR.SACHIDANAND L KHOT, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, EX.MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, HEBBAL VILLAGE AND POST, HUKKERI TALUK, BELAGUM DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.HARSHA P BANAD., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO.436, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU -560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.H.RAGHAVENDRA, AGA FOR R1) Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32804-DB WP No. 4559 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER, QUASHING THE UNDATED ENQUIRY REPORT BEARING NO.246/2015 PASSED BY THE JUSTICE FAROOQ ENQUIRY COMMITTEE REGARDING ‘G’ CATEGORY SITES ALLOTTED BY THE BDA WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H, (B) ISSUE APPROPRIATE WRIT/DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS TO EXECUTE A SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO SITE NO.555 IN HSR, SECTOR-6, BENGALURU MEASURING 40 X 60 AS PER ALLOTMENT LETTER DATED 25.11.2006 BEARING NO.BEM.AA.PRA.OO.KAA-1:555:H.S.R-6:06-07 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1. 2. This petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs: a) "Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, direction or order, quashing the undated Enquiry report bearing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32804-DB WP No. 4559 of 2025 no.246/2015 passed by the Justice Farooq Enquiry Committee regarding 'G' category sites allotted by the BDA which is produced at Annexure H of this Writ Petition. b) Issue appropriate Writ/direction to the respondents to execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioner with respect to site no.555 in HSR, Sector-6, Bengaluru measuring 40x60 as per allotment letter dated 25.11.2006 bearing no.BEM.Aa.PRA:Oo.KAA-1:555:HSR-6:06-07 produced at Annexure A of this Writ Petition. c) Pass such any order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case." 3. The contention is that pursuant to directions passed by this Court in a Public Interest Litigation, an enquiry Committee was constituted which filed its report in enquiry No.246/2015 directing resumption of the petitioner's site, as the petitioner was found ineligible as per Rule 10(3) of the BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984. 4. It is stated that on 16.04.2022, a notification was issued by the Karnataka Government amending Rule 10 of the BDA Allotment Rules, 1984, under which, the petitioner has gained eligibility for allotment of 'G' category sites. It is stated that a representation dated - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32804-DB WP No. 4559 of 2025 02.08.2024 was filed before the Commissioner of Bangalore Development Authority, which was submitted on 03.08.2024 in the office of the Commissioner- BDA. 5. It is noted from the enquiry report which is undated that it is an individual enquiry report in respect of the allotee, who is the petitioner in the instant case. A perusal of the report reflects that relying upon the then provision of sub rule (3) of rule 10 of the BDA Allotment of Sites Rules, 1984, the enquiry committee held that the allotee/petitioner was not entitled for the site in question under the general category. Accordingly, a direction was issued to the BDA to resume the site in question within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of that order by the BDA. 6. It has not been demonstrated by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the aforesaid direction of the enquiry committee, the allotted site was not resumed. However, it appears from perusal of the enquiry report that proceedings were held in the year - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32804-DB WP No. 4559 of 2025 2016. Now, the petitioner has come before this Court seeking benefit of notification dated 13.04.2022, issued by the Government of Karnataka. The amended Rule 10, which is appended as Annexure-K to this petition, reads as under: "Amendment of rule 10: In the said rules, in rule 10, in sub-rule (3), the words "or has been allotted a site or house in any part in the State by any other Urban Development Authority or the Karnataka Housing Board or such other agency of the Government" shall be deemed to have been omitted with effect from 14.12.2005." 7. A perusal of the amendment of Rule 10 reflects that a phrase in sub rule (3) of rule 10 has been omitted with effect from 14.12.2005, that is, prior to the enquiry report. 8. Under the circumstances, we deemed it fit to dispose of the petition, with a direction to the competent authority of the BDA to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 02.08.2024 filed on 03.08.2024 that is enclosed as Annexure-L to this writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32804-DB WP No. 4559 of 2025 We expect that a decision would be taken on the representation in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of the order passed today, along with another copy of the representation, is submitted before the competent authority. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6