- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 14887 OF 2026 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: SRI.A.NAGESH S/O. LATE ANDANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.1, 'HARSHA', SRI. BYRAWESHWARA NILAYA, CHANNANAYAKANA PALYA, NAGASANDRA POST, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU-560 073. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHESHKIRAN SHETTY S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, K. P. WEST, BENGALURU-560 020. Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SANKEY ROAD, PALACE GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 020. 4. SRI. M. VENKATARAM S/O. SRI. K. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.83/1, MALLAPPA LAYOUT, BABUSAPALYA POST, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 043. 5. SRI.MYLARI S/O. SRI. K. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT. NO. 83/1, MALLAPPA LAYOUT, BABUSAPALYA POST, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 043. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ADITYA DIWAKAR, AGA FOR R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION/OBJECTION DATED 19.03.2025 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent No.3 to consider his objections dated 19.03.2025 against apportionment of the compensation. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent No.3 to make a reference under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act, 1894') and decide the apportionment of the compensation to the extent of interest acquired by him, in respect of property bearing Sy.No.77 of Kalathammanahalli Village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to award the compensation by allotting the developed land in terms of the consent award bearing No.1243/2021-22 dated 23.11.2023 in respect of 1 acre in Sy.No.77 out of 1 acre 24 guntas situated at Kalathammanahalli. 2. (i) The petitioner contends that he had agreed to purchase of 1 acre out of 1 acre 24 guntas in Sy.No.77 of Kalathammanahalli, in terms of an agreement of sale dated - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 07.01.2019. Following this, a General Power of Attorney (henceforth referred to as ‘GPA’) was executed in his favour acknowledging the receipt of Rs.43,00,000/- and it was also mentioned therein that in case of acquisition of the land, the petitioner would be entitled to receive the compensation. The petitioner contends that the land bearing Sy.No.77 of Kalathammanahalli was the subject matter of an acquisition by the respondent No.2 for the purpose of formation of Dr.K.Shivaram Karanth Layout. (ii) He contends that the respondent No.4, after having executed the sale agreement and the GPA, had approached the respondent No.2 claiming 40% of the developed land in lieu of compensation. The petitioner submitted detailed objections on 19.03.2025, objecting to the allotment of developed land in lieu of compensation to the respondent No.4. He contends that till date no action is taken by the respondent No.3 to decide the objections raised and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has acquired an interest in the property and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 hence, he is entitled to receive the compensation in the form of developed land as per the scheme approved by the State Government. He has copiously referred to Section 202 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, to contend that the petitioner is an agent who has interest in the property and therefore, the petitioner has acquired not only interest but also right and is therefore entitled to receive the compensation that may be granted by the respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner is only an agreement holder and therefore had no right to receive the compensation in respect of the acquisition of the land. He contends that if the petitioner has any right, he has to work it out in accordance with law before the Civil Court and thereafter approach the respondents claiming compensation. He therefore contends that this Court cannot show any indulgence to the petitioner by issuing any direction to the respondent No.3 to consider the representation and thereby create a cause of action, which does not exist. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.1. 6. A perusal of the writ petition and the papers enclosed along with it shows that the petitioner had purportedly entered into an agreement of sale dated 07.01.2019 with the respondent No.4 and that the same was duly registered before the concerned sub-registrar. Following this, a GPA was executed by the respondent No.4 authorising him to do or cause to be done several acts, deeds and things mentioned therein, including the right to receive compensation in case of acquisition of the property agreed to be conveyed. However, it is relevant to note that the petitioner has not obtained an absolute conveyance of the property and therefore, he cannot stake a claim to the compensation that may be awarded by respondent Nos.2 and 3. If the petitioner is entitled to any right, he has to work it out before the Civil Court by either filing a suit for specific performance and claiming therein that he is entitled to receive the compensation in the form of developed land that may be allotted by the respondent Nos.2 and 3. He - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25730 WP No. 14887 of 2026 cannot oppose the determination of the compensation by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 by filing objections before the respondent No.3. 7. In that view of the matter, there is no need to show any indulgence to the petitioner by directing the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the objections filed by the petitioner against releasing the compensation in favour of the respondent No.4. Therefore, the petition lacks merit and is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioner to work out his remedy before the Civil Court in the manner stated above in accordance with law. 8. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file a memo of appearance within ten days. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45