- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50928 WP No. 35426 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 35426 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. K. M. SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS MEMBER, NELAMANGALA PLANNING AUTHORITY COUNCILOR, WARD NO.14 NELAMANGALA CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL RESIDING AT 7317, MUNICIPAL QUARTERS ROAD SUBASHNAGAR, NELAMANGALA …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUSHANTH V.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (BMRDA) NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD VASANTHANAGARA BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE NELAMANGALA PLANNING AUTHORITY REP BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50928 WP No. 35426 of 2025 2ND MAIN ROAD, SADASHIVANAGAR NELAMANGALA - 562 123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. YOGESH D. NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED MEETING NOTICE BEARING NO.NPA.125/2025-26 DATED 17.11.2025 CONVENING THE 125TH MEETING WITHOUT THE AGENDA (ANNEXURE-A) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned meeting notice bearing No.ೇಾ:125 ೇ ಸ ೆ:2025-26, dated 17.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.3. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent No.3 to supply full Agenda and relevant documents atleast seven clear days prior to all future meetings. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50928 WP No. 35426 of 2025 2. (i) The petitioner contends that he is one of the members of the Planning Authority. He contends that on 07.07.2025, the respondent No.3 issued a notice convening the 123rd meeting of the Planning Authority to be held on 18.07.2025. However, the meeting notice did not contain Agenda or list of subjects to be transacted. The petitioner objected to the same, consequent to which, the 123rd meeting was postponed. Later, another notice dated 17.11.2025 was issued in respect of the 125th meeting scheduled on 27.11.2025. This time too, the respondent No.3 did not enclose therewith copy of the Agenda and list of subjects to be transacted. (ii) The petitioner contends that Rule 11 of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965 mandates that every member should be informed of the subjects to be transacted well in advance and that ten days' clear notice should be given. It is also claimed that every meeting notice should contain Agenda and list of subjects to be transacted. (iii) The petitioner is therefore, before this Court challenging the impugned notice of the meeting dated 17.11.2025 on the above grounds. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50928 WP No. 35426 of 2025 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the purpose of sending Agenda and list of subjects well in advance to members is to ensure that they can apply their mind and come prepared for the meeting. He therefore, submits that without the Agenda and list of subjects, no purpose would be served and hence, impugned meeting notice is liable to be quashed. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that this Court had granted an interim order staying the meeting scheduled on 27.11.2025 and that the meeting was not held on 27.11.2025. He contends that henceforth, the respondent No.3 shall ensure strict compliance of Rule 11 of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965. He contends that the respondent No.3 after complying with the above, would convene a meeting and the petitioner would be informed of the same suitably. 5. In view of the aforesaid submission, nothing survives for consideration in this petition. However, the respondent No.3 is directed to strictly comply with the Rule 11 of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965 in letter and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50928 WP No. 35426 of 2025 spirit and it shall also convene a meeting after issuing appropriate notices to the petitioner and all others concerned. 6. The writ petition stands disposed off on the above terms. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70