Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 54018 (KAR)

THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE v. VINAYAKA EDUCATIONAL TRUST

WA/206/2023 · 2025-08-12

Anu Sivaraman, Rajesh Rai K

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31204-DB WA No. 206 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 206 OF 2023 (BDA) BETWEEN: 1. THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BBMP HEAD OFFICE PREMISES, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, WARD NO.13, GAYATRINAGARA RANGE, SHANKARA MUTT, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, II STAGE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BENGALURU THE APPELLANTS ARE REPRESENTED BY SRI CHANDRASHEKAR PATIL HEAD OF THE LEGAL CELL AND DELEGATED AUTHORITY BBMP, BENGALURU …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SANJEEV B.L., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31204-DB WA No. 206 of 2023 AND: 1. VINAYAKA EDUCATIONAL TRUST A REGISTERED PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.1, 1ST MAIN ROAD, THOMAS BUILDING, J.C. NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 086 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY AND DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MR. B. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER 3. SRI. SATHYANARAYANA HOUSE BULDING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, NO.20, SATHYANARAYANA LAYOUT, 4TH BLOCK, 3RD STAGE, BASAWESHWARANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 079 REP BY ITS PRESIDENT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI I.S. DEVAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1; SMT. LATHA S.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI MURUGESH V. CHARATI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SMT. LEKHA N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI T. SESHAGIRI RAO., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23/11/2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO.10047/2019 (BDA) AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31204-DB WA No. 206 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) The writ petition had been disposed of with the directions to respondents No.1 and 2, who are the officials of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, to restore and handover portion of the Civic Amenity Site demarcated as Playground and Anganawadi Centre in the sketch which was produced as Annexure 'R3' within three months. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that since Anganawadi, as a matter of fact, is functioning in the property in question, the direction issued by the learned Single Judge to restore and hand over the portion of the Civic Amenity Site to respondent No.1 is therefore not warranted. It is further submitted that the contentions raised by the appellants before the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31204-DB WA No. 206 of 2023 learned Single Judge were not properly considered while passing the impugned order. 3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and considered the contentions advanced. It is clear from the materials on record that there was allotment of the Civic Amenity Site in favour of respondent No.1 herein and that the said Civic Amenity Site was liable to be handed over by the appellants. 4. The fact that the appellants had not handed over the entire property to respondent No.1 and that the portion of the Civic Amenity Site which is allotted to respondent No.1 is being used as playground and an Anganawadi building, cannot stand in the way of the Civic Amenity Site being handed over to the respondent No.1 for construction of school building. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has considered all the contentions raised by the appellants and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31204-DB WA No. 206 of 2023 that there is no merit in the contentions advanced by the appellants in this appeal as well. 6. In the above view of the matter, the appeal is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. The directions issued by the learned Single Judge to hand over the subject Civic Amenity Site to respondent No.1 shall be complied with, within a period of three months from today. SD/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16