- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8684 WP No. 15398 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 15398 OF 2024 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: 1. SYED BABA SON OF LATE ABDUL RAHMAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 2. FAREEDA WIFE OF SYED BABA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 3. SAMEERA DAUGHTER OF LATE SYED BABA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS 4. FEROZA DAUGHTER OF SYED BABA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS PETITIONER NO.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT NO.2093, 3RD MAIN, 5TH CROSS, NEAR QUBA MASJID, LAL BAHADUR SHASTHRI NAGAR, VIMANAPURA, BENGALURU - 560017 5. IRSHAD BEGUM WIFE OF LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 6. AYISHA TAJ DAUGHTER OF LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS Digitally signed by ROOPA R U Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8684 WP No. 15398 of 2024 7. MUJAHID PASHA SON OF LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 8. MUJEEB SON OF LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 9. AFSAR PASHA SON OF LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS PETITIONER NOs.5 TO 9 ARE RESIDING AT NO.6, 26TH B MAIN PUTTAYYAN PALYA BENGALURU - 560 069 10. ZAREEN TAJ WIFE OF LATE SHAIK AYUB AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 11. AKBAR PASHA SON OF LATE SHAIKH AYUB AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 12. FIROZ PASHA SON OF LATE SHAIKH AYUB AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 13. MAZHAR PASHA SON OF LATE SHAIK AYUB AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS PETITIONER NO.10 TO 13 ARE RESIDING AT NO 6, 26TH B MAIN, PUTTAYYAN PALYA BENGALURU - 560069 14. IRSHAD BEGUM WIFE OF SYED BAKASH - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8684 WP No. 15398 of 2024 NO.279, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, ISLAMPUR BANGALORE - 560 017 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ROHAN HOSMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, REPRESENTED ITS SECRETARY. 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560020 REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER OFFICE OF BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R1; SRI MURUGESH V. CHARATI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO R-1 AND R-2 IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO ALLOT ALTERNATIVE SITE(S) OF EQUIVALENT EXTENT IN LIEU OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENTIRE EXTENT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW. 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 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8684 WP No. 15398 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Petitioners are before this Court seeking issue of writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for allotment of alternate sites of equallent extent in lieu of development of entire extent of their property without due process of law. 2. Case of the petitioners is that one late Khasim Saib s/o late Bude Sabi was in possession and enjoyment of land measuring 7 acres 14 guntas in Sy.No.39/2 including Sy.No.39/2A and 39/2B situated at Tavarekere Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk now known as Jayanagar 9th Block Layout as described in the schedule to the writ petition. That though respondent -BDA had sought to acquire an extent of 6 guntas in the said land for the purpose of further extension of 9th Block Jayanagar, without due process of law the entire extent of land shown in the schedule to the writ petition has been utilized. 3. That the katherdar late Kasim Saib passed away on 13.12.1965. The petitioners being the legal representatives of the said notified kathedars were not aware of the acquisition - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8684 WP No. 15398 of 2024 proceedings. That taking advantage of the situation, though 6 guntas of land was notified entire extent of land is utilized by the respondent -BDA. The legal representatives of the notified kathedars being minor at the time of his death, could not resist their forcible dispossession from the property by the respondent -BDA. The petitioner No.1 herein after collecting the information regarding the subject matter of the writ petition had started pursuing the matter to the respondent -BDA. Representation dated 09.02.2024 had been made in this regard. Followed by further representations dated 01.03.2024 and 02.04.2024. However, there has been no response from the respondent -BDA in this regard. Hence, the writ petition. 4. Counsel for the respondent -BDA submits that though petitioners who are claiming to be the legal representative of the original kathedars have filed the petition belatedly, given some time on petitioners satisfying all requirements of the respondent-BDA, case of the petitioners would be considered in accordance with law. 5. Submission is taken on record. 6. Hence, the following; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8684 WP No. 15398 of 2024 ORDER 1. Petition is disposed of. 2. The respondent-BDA shall consider the representations dated 09.02.2024 and 02.04.2024 produced at Annexures-H and J of the petitioner No.1 after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and if the petitioner No.1 is found eligible appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law. 3. Such orders shall be passed within an outer limit of four (4) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 212