- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54207 WP No. 38331 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.38331 OF 2025 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: SMT. R. MUTHULAKSHMI W/O LATE SRI RADHANATH AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS , RESIDING AT NO.B-206, RENAISSANCE PARK 3, 1ST MAIN, SUBRAMANYANAGAR, MALLESHWARAM WEST, BANGALORE-560 055. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHARAN P SABARAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER, AT: T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020. 3. ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AT: T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI M. RAO, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI VASANTHA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3) Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54207 WP No. 38331 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 – BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATIONS DATED 30.09.2013 (ANNEXURE-H), 09.07.2018 (ANNEXURE-J) AND 27.11.2025 (ANNEXURE-M) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DIVISION BENCH JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.1783/2014 AT ANNEXURE-C AND CONNECTED CASES, AND ALLOT ALTERNATIVE SITE ON PRIORITY WITHIN A TIME-BOUND PERIOD TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT, ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent No.1. 2. Sri. Vasantha, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following prayers: “WHEREFORE, it is humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to: (a) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 – Bangalore Development Authority to consider the Petitioner's - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54207 WP No. 38331 of 2025 representations dated 30.09.2013 (Annexure-H), 09.07.2018 (Annexure-J) and 27.11.2025 (Annexure-M) in accordance with the Division Bench judgment in W.A.No.1783/2014 at Annexure-C and connected cases, and allot alternative site on priority within a time-bound period to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; (b) If necessary, a direction may also be issued to issue necessary application for allotment of alternate site and to provide further information to the Petitioner. (c) Pass any other order or direction as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court including the cost of the writ petition in the interest of justice and equity.” 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material and record. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is a site owner, whose property was acquired by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for the formation of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda layout. It is also - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54207 WP No. 38331 of 2025 not in dispute that the Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Bangalore Development Authority and another Vs. Sri. R. Shankaran and another1, (R. Shankaran) has upheld the acquisition proceedings and issued specific directions governing the rights of landowners and site owners, including allotment of alternative sites subject to eligibility and compliance with the rules. 6. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is essentially with regard to the non-consideration of her representation and non-issuance of the prescribed application form by the respondent-authority, despite the aforesaid binding directions of the Division Bench. The petitioner, being a senior citizen aged about 75 years, asserts a prolonged inaction on the part of the respondents. 7. This Court is of the considered view that the grievance raised by the petitioner can be appropriately addressed by directing respondent-authority to facilitate submission of the application in the prescribed form and 1 W.A. No.1783/2014 & con. matters D.D. 22.02.2024 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54207 WP No. 38331 of 2025 consider the same in accordance with the direction issued by the Division Bench and applicable statutory provisions. At this stage, this Court does not find it necessary to enter upon the merits of the petitioner's claim for allotment of an alternative size. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be allowed, reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit the prescribed application and by issuing time bound directions to the respondents for consideration thereof and hence, the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed-in-part. ii. The respondents are directed to furnish the prescribed application form to the petitioner for allotment of an alternative site within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. iii. The petitioner is at liberty to submit the application in the prescribed form along with all necessary documents, within two weeks thereafter. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54207 WP No. 38331 of 2025 iv. Upon submission of the application, the respondents shall consider the representation and application of the petitioner for allotment of an alternative site on priority basis having regard to the age of the petitioner in accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench in R.Shankaran’s case and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the application. v. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and all the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27