- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43785-DB RP No. 477 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA REVIEW PETITION NO. 477 OF 2024 BETWEEN: B.R.CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, S/O LATE RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/A BANGELE VILLAGE, SULIKERE POST, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT -560 060. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.M.C.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 020. 2. THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43785-DB RP No. 477 of 2024 URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. AZRA S. DUNDGE., ADVOCATE) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 READ WITH RULE 39 OF THE WRIT PROCEEDINGS 1977 PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 22/02/2024 IN W.A. NO.2067/2014 (LA-BDA) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) ORDER ON IA NO.1/2024 The application-IA No.1/2024 for condonation of delay of 212 days in filing the review petition is not opposed by the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. Therefore, the application is allowed and the delay is condoned. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43785-DB RP No. 477 of 2024 ORDER ON REVIEW PETITION Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioner. 2. This petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment and order dated 22.02.2024 passed in Writ Appeal No.2067/2014. The learned counsel has referred to the ground in Paragraph No.5 of the review petition, which is as under:- “5. It is further submitted in the said land there are 100 arecanut trees is growing which were 30 years old, there were 100 guava trees which were 10 years old, there were 100 coconut trees which were 40 years old, there are 30 jackfruit trees which were 15 to 20 years old, there are 50 teak tree which were 15 years old, there were 5 chickoo plants which were 10 years old and there were 15 sugar apple plants,. the petitioner is depending upon the earnings derived from the said plant and trees and agriculture is the only source of income to the petitioner for his livelihood and hence, it is just and necessary to delete the land from the acquisition proceedings, the learned single judge considering all things was pleased to allow the writ petition filed by the petitioner and the same is legal and valid. Hence, the order passed by this Hon’ble Court is liable to be reviewed.” He therefore prays that the land be excluded from acquisition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43785-DB RP No. 477 of 2024 3. A perusal of the judgment sought to be reviewed reflects that the ground being raised by the petitioner in the instant petition was considered by the Division Bench in the writ appeal exhaustively from paragraph No.58 onwards. After considering a catena of decisions both of this Court as well as of the Supreme Court, from paragraph No.64 onwards, there is an elaborate consideration of the rights of such owners. As a matter of fact, in the operative part under the heading of ‘order’, the preliminary notification bearing No.BDA/COMMR/DC (LA)/ALAO/158/2009-2009, Bengalore, dated 21.05.2008 and the final notification bearing No. UDD 51 MNX 2010, Bengalore, dated 18.02.2010 issued for acquisition of lands for formation of the “Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout” were upheld subject to certain conditions, quoted hereunder:- a) With regard to the land owners (excluding the site owners): i) All the land owners/writ petitioners who are seeking for dropping of their lands from acquisition on the ground that their lands are (1) nursery lands; (2) situated within green belt; (3) totally built up; (4) that the buildings are constructed by religious/charitable educational institutions; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43785-DB RP No. 477 of 2024 (5) that similar adjoining lands have been either left out from acquisition or de-notified, are permitted to make an application to the BDA seeking for dropping of their lands from acquisition by producing all such material that they deem fit/necessary in support of their applications within 3 months from today; (ii) The BDA shall consider each of the said application/s keeping in mind the status of the lands as on the date of the preliminary notification and without taking into consideration any developments /improvements/constructions made subsequent to the preliminary notification; iii) The BDA shall complete the exercise of considering the applications of the writ petitioners and deciding on the same within an outer limit of six months from today; iv) The BDA, upon consideration of the applications shall intimate the writ petitioners about its decision; v) If the BDA is of the opinion that the acquisition will have to be proceeded with, the BDA is at - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43785-DB RP No. 477 of 2024 liberty to proceed further in accordance with law; xxx xxx xxx xxx 4. In view of the aforesaid, it is evident that the ground sought to be raised in this review petition has been addressed. Be that as it may, what the petitioner seeks before this Court is to challenge the legality of the acquisition of his land, which right is not available to him in a review petition. There is no error apparent on the face of the record. This petition is therefore dismissed. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KGR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1