- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41668 WP No. 21464 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.21464 OF 2025 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. K.K. SUGUNAMBA W/O M. RAJA GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. SMT. K.K. SUNITHA D/O LATE KEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.733, PATEL MUNIVENKATAPPA LAYOUT NAGAVARA, BENGALURU-560 045. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI R. SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA KRUPA WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 020 REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR LAND ACQUISITION BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA KRUPA WEST Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41668 WP No. 21464 of 2025 T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BANGALORE-560 020. 4. THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA KRUPA WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BANGALORE-560 020. 5. THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE EAST TALUK, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU-560036. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HARISHA A.S., AGA FOR R-1 & R-5; SRI ACHAPPA P.B., ADVOCATE FOR R-2 TO R-4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO ISSUE ERRATA NOTIFICATION/CORRIGENDUM TO THE NOTIFICATION BEARING NO’S (A) BDA/COMMR/ALAO/LA9/104/2002-03, BANGALORE DATED 03/02/2003 (ANNEXURE-G) (B) UDD 193 MNX 2004 BANGALORE DATED 23/02/2004 (ANNEXURE-J) AND (C) UDD-426 MNJ 2011 BANGALORE DATED 18/06/2014 (ANNEXURE-L), TO THE EFFECT THAT, “THE LAND BEARING SY NO.91 MEASURING 20 ACRES OF THANISANDRA VILLAGE, K R PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK IS WRONGLY INCLUDED IN THE BDA NOTIFICATIONS DATED 03/02/2003, 23/02/2004 AND 18/06/2014 AND THE SAME IS TO BE TREATED AS THE SAID LAND IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS OF THE “ARKAVATHI LAYOUT” BY CONSIDERING THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 DATED 23/04/2003 (ANNEXURE-H) AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04/12/2024 PASSED IN O.S. NO.5771/2006 BY THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-5) (ANNEXURE-P) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41668 WP No. 21464 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 to 4 to take necessary steps to issue errata notification/corrigendum to the effect that the land bearing Sy. No.91 measuring 20 acres of Thanisandra Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk is wrongly included in BDA Notifications dated 03.02.2003, 23.02.2004 and 18.06.2014 and the same be treated as the said land is not included in the acquisition proceedings of the Arkavathi layout by considering the objections filed by respondent No.5 dated 23.04.2003 (Annexure-H), and judgment and decree dated 04.12.2024 in O.S. No.5771/2006 (Annexure-P) and further sought a mandamus directing respondent No.5 to delete the entry at column No.11 of the RTC for Sy. No.91 of Thanisandra Village, insofar as mentioning notification No.UDD 193 MNX 2004 Bengaluru dated 23.02.2004. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41668 WP No. 21464 of 2025 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 and 5 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the records. 3. Land bearing Sy. No.91 of Thanisandra Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru, measures a total extent of 39 acres. It is the case of the petitioners that as per the objections filed by respondent No.5 at Annexure-H, out of 39 acres, 04 acres were granted in favour of D. Krishnappa and 04 acres in favour of Anjinappa and remaining 31 acres in favour of the police department. It is therefore contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that inclusion of 20 acres from Sy. No.91 in the BDA notifications is erroneous, as no such extent of land was actually available for acquisition. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the petitioners may be permitted to submit a representation stating out these facts in detail and that upon receipt of such representations, the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41668 WP No. 21464 of 2025 respondents-authorities will consider the same in accordance with law. 5. Although the petitioners have sought declare that 20 acres of the land in Sy. No.91, have been wrongly included in BDA acquisition notifications, it is apparent that no formal representation in this regard has been made to the concerned authorities. In these circumstances, without entering into the merits and demerits of the claim, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the petition with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent authorities. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to submit a detailed representation to respondent Nos.1 and 2, along with copy of the objections filed by respondent No.5 and other relevant documents, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41668 WP No. 21464 of 2025 ii. Upon receipt of such representation, respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall consider the same, taking into account the objections filed by respondent No.5 and the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.5771/2006 dated 04.12.2024 and shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within an outer limit of three months thereafter. Sd/- ______________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79