- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34411-DB WA No. 547 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2024 (BDA) BETWEEN: SRI. B. DEVENDRA S/O SRI. BILIGIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT No.118 3RD FLOOR, 6TH CROSS ROAD GOVINAYAKANAHALLI, 2ND STAGE KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 078 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAIK N.R., ADVOCATE) AND: THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU - 560020 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MURUGESH V CHARATI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO (i) SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN WP No.9625/2019 (BDA) DATED 05.09.2023 BY DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND ETC. Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34411-DB WA No. 547 of 2024 THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 2. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 05.09.2023 in W.P.No.9625/2019. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that earlier, a site has been allotted in favour of appellant's mother Smt. Sarojamma by the Karnataka Housing Board ('KHB' for short) on 15.11.1978. However, appellant's mother was suffering from cancer and the said site had to be sold on 27.04.2001. Thereafter, applications were made for allotment of site to the Bangalore Development Authority - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34411-DB WA No. 547 of 2024 ('BDA' for short) and the BDA had issued a communication dated 26.08.2008 produced as Annexure-F in terms of which, appellant's application was processed and he was called upon to pay the balance unpaid amount with interest, which was also paid. It is submitted that thereafter, allotment was cancelled on the ground that the fact that the appellant's mother had been allotted a site by the KHB earlier was not disclosed in the application preferred by the appellant. 4. The learned Single Judge having considered the specific queries in the application as well as the provisions of Rule 10(3) of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 (the '1984 Rules' for short) held that there was a clear embargo against allotment of sites to persons, members of whose family have already been allotted sites either by BDA, KHB or any other similar Authority including Co-operative Societies. It was found that the appellant had never disclosed the fact - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34411-DB WA No. 547 of 2024 that his mother had been allotted a site that had already been sold. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the specific embargo contained in Rule 10(3) of the 1984 Rules as well as the specific information sought under clause 21 of the application for allotment of sites, we are of the opinion that there is no error in the findings of the learned Single Judge. The writ petition therefore fails, same is accordingly dismissed. The direction issued by the learned Single Judge for refund shall be processed by the respondent-BDA in accordance with law. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17