- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8431 WP No. 106327 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 106327 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: RAGHAVENDRA RAMRAO KULKARNI, AGE: 79 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. SWAROOP NAGAR, AKALUJ SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA STATE-413101, REPRESENTED THROUGH GPA HOLDER, IMTIYAZ S/O. MOHAMMAD ALI, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SECTOR NO.73, PLOT NO.C5, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. GAYATRI S.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, BAGALKOT TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BAGALKOT-587 103. 2. THE REHABILITATION OFFICER, BAGALKOT TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BAGALKOT-587 103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANJAY CHANAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING, i. TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 27.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE- G BEARING NO.PU A: CR:2023-24 1837 BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR WRITS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEMS FIT TO ISSUE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ii. ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO ALLOT “E” CATEGORY SITE TO THE PETITIONER AS PER ORDER PER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 24-12-2019 AND 19-08-2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND H IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8431 WP No. 106327 of 2024 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sanjay Chanal, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. Petitioner is the resident of Bagalkot and is the joint owner of property bearing No.177/D, ward No.10 which was acquired by the SLAO, BTDA, Bagalkot for Upper Krishna Project in the year 1995-96. The State of Karnataka, pursuant to the Upper Krishna Project, came up with the Housing Scheme for the purpose of rehabilitation of persons who lost their properties and accordingly, displaced families were entitled for allotment of sites. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that, BTDA allotted 3 sites in the name of other joint owner, but the petitioner was not allotted any site. The petitioner made a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8431 WP No. 106327 of 2024 representation in the year 2019 for allotment of ‘E’ category site at Navanagar, Bagalkote. Though the respondents received the application of the petitioner for allotment of site, despite considerable amount of time, the petitioner did not receive any reply, however, an endorsement came to be received on 27.10.2023, stating that the site in question under Category-E is allotted to the family of the petitioner jointly and two sites under ‘A’ category to two adult children, in respect of the property submerged, as such allotment of ‘E’ category site to the petitioner is not considered. 5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that, as per the definition, each displaced family means husband or wife and his or her spouse and the dependant children. Therefore, the endorsement issued is without the authority of law and the petitioner ought to have been allotted the site. Despite the detailed representation being made subsequently on 19.08.2023 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8431 WP No. 106327 of 2024 vide Annexure-H, it is not considered by the respondents. Hence the petitioner is before this court. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that, non-allotment of the site under the Government Scheme has caused hardship and inconvenience to the petitioner and respondents have violated the gazette notification for allotment of free sites for displaced family members under the scheme and the petitioner is legally entitled to one such site for having been displaced under the Upper Krishna Project. Learned counsel also contends that, in the identical facts of the case with regard to allotment of sites to displaced persons, where the claim was rejected by this Court, the Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal and ordered for allotment of site to the displaced persons by providing an opportunity of hearing. Therefore, she contends that similarly placed petitioner is also entitled for the similar relief. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8431 WP No. 106327 of 2024 7. Learned Counsel for the respondent Sri.Sanjay Chanal also relies upon the very same judgment in Writ Appeal No.100507/2023 and contended that, despite the fact that the Division Bench of this Court had set aside the order and allowed the appeal and ordered for implementation of the scheme as per the letter and spirit of the scheme to those displaced persons, if the necessary relevant documents are produced, they will consider and pass suitable order in accordance with law, so also in accordance with the judgment in Writ Appeal No.100507/2023. 8. In view of the above submissions, nothing further remains for consideration. This petition will have to be allowed in view of the writ appeal having been decided in the identical matters. The petitioner is at liberty to submit representation to the respondent authority within a week’s time from the date of receipt of copy of the order along with necessary documents, which shall be considered by the respondents in accordance with the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8431 WP No. 106327 of 2024 rules and regulations of the scheme, so also the Judgment in W.A.No.100507/2023 & connected matters, and pass suitable orders. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. This petition is allowed. ii. The endorsement dated 27.10.2025 is hereby quashed. iii. Writ of mandamus is issued directing respondent No.2 to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 24.12.2019 and 19.08.2023 and the fresh representation filed, if any, and pass suitable orders in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner, in accordance with law. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12