- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54466 WP No. 8857 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.8857 OF 2025 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: MUDASIR PASHA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O. MR. S. MOULA, R/AT NO.6, 1ST MAIN, 3RD CROSS, GORIPALYA, JR NAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH, BANGALORE-560 018. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHRAVAN S. LOKRE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT, 5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU-560020. REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, 5TH MAIN ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU-560020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAJ KUMAR M., AGA FOR R-1; SRI B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3) Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54466 WP No. 8857 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 38D OF THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, 1976 DATED 15.02.2025 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents-BDA to consider his representation dated 15.02.2025 submitted under Section 38D of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (‘BDA Act’ for short). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in settled possession of the schedule property for several decades and has produced sufficient materials in support of such possession. It is argued that - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54466 WP No. 8857 of 2025 Section 38 of the BDA Act cast the duty on the authority to consider the representation seeking regularization. It is further contended that till such consideration, the respondents cannot dispossess the petitioner without following due process of law. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents- BDA submits that the representation of the petitioner shall be considered in accordance with law. It is contended that no indefensible right can be claimed merely on basis of possession and that the petitioner's claim requires examination by the competent authority under the statutory scheme. 5. This Court has carefully considered the contentions urged by both sides and perused the material on record. 6. The grievance of the petitioner is non- consideration of his representation dated 15.02.2025 submitted under Section 38D of the BDA Act. Without - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54466 WP No. 8857 of 2025 expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim, this Court is of the view that the respondents are required to discharge the statutory duty by considering the representation submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of. ii. The respondents-BDA shall consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.02.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. iii. Till such consideration, the respondents shall not disturb the possession of the petitioner. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41