- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 940 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: 1. SMT.MAHIMA VIJENDRA D/O M.S. VIJENDRA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.D-303, ADARSHA RESIDENCY, 8TH BLOCK, JAYANANGARA, BENGALURU-56041. REP BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER DR. M.S.VIJENDRA S/O LATE SETHU MADAVACHAR AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/A FLAT NO.D-303 ADARSHA RESIDENCY, 8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGARA BENGALURU-560041. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.R.HEMANTH RAJ., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU-560020. Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 2. THE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT (BDA & BE-1), VIKASA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BASAVARAJA.H.T., ADV. FOR R1; SRI.HARISHA.A.S., AGA FOR R2) ***** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT NO.BEAPRA/SAHA/MAHA AND MAMA/166/2024-25 DATED 30.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN THE WRIT PETITION; AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ALLOT THE SCHEDULE LAND TO THE PETITIONER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 38 D OF BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2020. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner in this petition has sought to quash the impugned endorsement dated 30.10.2024 issued by the first respondent (Annexure-A) and to direct the respondents to allot the schedule land in accordance with the Section 38 D of Bangalore Development Authority (Amendment) Act, 2020 (for short “the Act”). 2. Learned counsel on both sides submit that the lis involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of FAR EAST BROADCASTING ASSOCIATION OF INDIA SOCIETY v/s THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS1(FAR EAST BROADCASTING), wherein it was held that Commissioner who issued such endorsement at Annexure-A is not the ‘Competent Authority’ to deal with matters under Section 38-D of the Act. 1 W.P.No.30828/2024, disposed of on 24th January 2025 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in FAR EAST BROADCASTING at paragraphs 9, 10 and 11, has held as under: “9. The aforesaid provisions of Act and Rules would make is clear that the ‘Competent Authority’ to deal with the issues of consideration of case under Section 38D of the Act, is ‘the Bengaluru Development Authority’ as defined under Section 2(a) of the Act, 1976. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the respondent-SLAO in the absence of any provisions under the Act authorizing him is clearly one without jurisdiction and authority. As such, impugned endorsement dated 20.08.2024 produced at Annexure-A requires to be set-aside on this ground alone. 10. Notwithstanding the above, the said order also suffers from same having been passed without affording any opportunity and without holding any enquiry as required under Section 38D of the Act, 1976 even on this ground the impugned endorsement is liable to be quashed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 11. Accordingly, following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is disposed of. (ii) The Impugned Endorsement dated 20.08.2024, produced at Annexure-A issued by respondent No.3-Additional Land Acquisition Officer, BDA is hereby quashed. (iii) The matter is relegated to Respondent No.1/BDA, who shall cause an enquiry to be conducted and shall afford sufficient opportunity to the petitioner of being heard strictly as contemplated under Section 38D of the Act, 1976 and Rule 4 of the Bangalore Development Authority Allotment of Unauthorized Sites with Building Rules, 2021 and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within an outer limit of 6 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (iv) It is made clear, respondent-Authorities or their representatives shall not take any precipitative actions against the petitioners - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 until determination of the matter by the respondent-BDA, as directed hereinabove. (v) It is further made clear that while considering the matter, the respondent-BDA shall also take into consideration of the earlier resolution which is passed in this matter. 4. The issue involved in the present writ petition being identical and squarely covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench in FAR EAST BROADCASTING and this Court also deems it appropriate to pass similar order. Accordingly, this Court passes the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is disposed of. (ii) The impugned endorsement dated 30.10.2024 issued by respondent No.1 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed. (iii) The matter is relegated to Respondent No.1/BDA to hold enquiry and, after affording sufficient - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43773 WP No. 940 of 2025 opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with Section 38D of the Act, 1976 and Rule 4 of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Unauthorized Sites with Building) Rules, 2021, within an outer limit of 6 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (iv) It is directed that the respondent-Authorities shall not take any precipitative action against the petitioner until final determination of the matter by the respondent-BDA, as directed above. (v) It is further made clear that while considering the matter, the respondent-BDA shall also take into consideration of the earlier resolution which is passed in this matter. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MPK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51