- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO. 11692 OF 2026 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: SRI. GNANESHA B.K., S/O KRISHNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, NO.998, 4TH A MAIN, 7TH A CROSS, CHIKKADINNE ATTUR LAYOUT, BENGLAURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 064. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. ANUSHA NANDISH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PRECINCTS, 5TH MAIN RD, KUMARAPARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 020. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER. 2. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, (DR. SHIVARAM KARANTH LAYOUT RAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE), BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PRECINCTS, 5TH MAIN RD, KUMARAPARK WEST, Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHIVAPRASAD M SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 - BDA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS, ANY ORDER(s)/DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FOR REGULARIZATION MADE TO THE JUSTICE A.V. CHANDRASHEKAR COMMITTEE VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BEARING NO.00971 DATED 29/03/2021 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULARIZATION OF HIS RESIDENTIAL HOUSE BEARING SITE NO.32, KATHA NO.242/204/32, PROPERTY NO.150200201900200198, SITUATED AT RAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK MEASURING EAST - WEST 40 FT., NORTH - SOUTH 30 FT., TOTALLY MEASURING 1200 SQ.FT INTO THE DR. SHIVARAMKARANTH LAYOUT AND TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF REGULARIZATION WITHIN A PERIOD OF TWO WEEKS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) The petitioner is before the Court seeking the following prayers: "WHEREFORE, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, any Order(s)/Directions directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to consider the application for regularization made to the Justice A V Chandrashekar Committee vide Acknowledgment bearing No. 00971 dated 29.03.2021 for the purpose of regularization of his residential house bearing Site No. 32, Katha No. 242/204/32, Property No. 150200201900200198, situated at Ramagondanahalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk measuring East - West: 40 Ft, North-South: 30 Ft, totally measuring 1200 Sq. Ft. into the Dr. Shivaramkarath Layout. and to issue a Certificate of Regularization within a period of 2 weeks; b. Issue any other Writ, Order(s)/Direction(s) as may deem fit by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Heard Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Shivaprasad M. Shantanagoudar, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - BDA. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner Smt. Anusha would submit that in an identical case i.e., in W.P.No.29788/2026(LA-BDA), between SMT. KAMALA S v. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER, disposed of on 06.02.2026, this Bench has made the following observations: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 "Heard Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned Counsel appearing for petitioner along with Sri.Shivaprasad M.Shantanagoudar, learned Counsel appearing for respondents/Bangalore Development Authority (‘BDA’ for short). 2. The Petitioner is said to be holder of a revenue site and constructed a dwelling house in the site bearing No.37, Khata No.285/37, of Ramagondanahalli, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bengaluru, which came to be acquired for formation of Dr.Shivaramakaranth Layout. The petitioner though seek consideration of her representation submitted on 29.12.2020 pursuant to the orders of the Apex Court, the issue would be entitlement of the petitioner for the relief qua the site she had held. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for BDA Sri.Shivaprasad M. Shantanagoudar submits that the Apex Court has considered the grievances of the revenue site holders in the layout formed in Dr.Shivaramakaranth Layout. 4. The Apex Court, in its order dated 05-05- 2021, answering Miscellaneous Application Nos.1614-1616 of 2019 notices the affidavit filed by the BDA in respect of previous layouts formed by the BDA in which purchasers of revenue apply for allotment of sites measuring 30x40’. The Apex Court observes as follows: “…. …. …. (4) In our Order dated 18.03.2021, we had observed as under: "It appears that certain persons belonging to poor and middle-income groups have purchased house sites from the land owners whose lands have been notified for the acquisition for the formation of the lay-out in question, prior to the date of the judgment - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 dated 03.08.2018. We are of the view that their grievances also require to be redressed. we are informed that similar grievances of the purchasers of the sites in other layouts formed by the Bangalore Development Authority have been redressed by the Bangalore Development Authority. The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, is directed to place on record the mode and manner of redressal of the grievances of such site- holders adopted by the Bangalore Development Authority in the previously formed lay-outs within a period of four weeks from today." (5) In compliance of the above order, the Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority (B.D.A.), has filed an affidavit dated 12.04.2021 stating that in respect of the previous lay-outs formed by the B.D.A. such as Anjanapura Layout, sir M. Vishweshwaraiah Layout, Banashankari 6th Stage layout, the purchasers of the revenue sites in those lay- outs have been permitted to apply for allotment of sites measuring 30 ft. x 40 ft. even though the sites purchased. The affidavit also indicates the other conditions based on which the sites were allotted to the revenue site holders. (6) In consideration of the above, we are of the view that the purchasers of sites in Dr. Shivaram Karanth Layout are entitled for allotment of sites provided that their purchase of such sites is prior to the date of the judgment i.e. 03.08.2018. (7) The purchasers of the sites in Dr. Shivaram Karanth Layout are permitted to get themselves registered in the B.D.A. as applicants for allotment of sites under the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 of Sites) Rules, 1984 ("B.D.A. Allotment of Site Rules") within 4 months from today. (8) These purchasers should not he owning any other residential property in Bangalore and surrounding vicinity. They shall be bound by all the other terms and conditions for allotment of sites as per the B.D.A. Allotment of Site Rules. (9) The General Power of Attorney holders and persons having an Agreement to Sell are not entitled for allotment of the sites. (10) Purchasers of sites, through registered sale deeds, prior to 03.08.2018, are alone entitled for allotment of sites as per this order. (11) The B.D.A. shall calculate the compensation payable to the applicants in respect of their acquired sites and give credit accordingly by adjusting the same towards the allotment price for the sites to be allotted and call upon the applicants to pay the balance, if any. (12) The allotment of sites is restricted to sites measuring 30 ft. x40 ft. being the maximum extent irrespective of the measurement of their sites that have been acquired by the B.D.A. (13) The applicants have to withdraw the cases filed by them, if any, challenging the acquisition of their lands, before filing an application with the B.D.A. in terms of this order. (14) The purchasers of the sites are permitted to apply for allotment of sites to the B.D.A. along with self-certified photocopy of the title deeds on or before 17.09.2021. It is clarified that they need not pay the initial deposit. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 documents submitted by the applicants along with their applications for allotment of sites in terms of this order shall be referred by the Commissioner, B.D.A., to a committee of retired District Judges comprising of a Chairman and two Members. The Committee so appointed shall examine the title deed of the applicants and submit a report as to the ownership of the sites to the Commissioner, B.D.A. The rival claim(s), if any, shall also be decided by the committee. The B.D.A. would allot sites only to those applicants who are duly certified by this Committee as the owners, subject to their satisfying other conditions of this order.” The Apex Court, in terms of the aforesaid order, directed constitution of a Committee to go in the issue of revenue site holders. In furtherance of the direction so issued, Bopaiah Committee is constituted to specifically go into the issue of the revenue site holders and their respective claim. 5. In the light of the direction by the Apex Court as quoted supra, and the constitution of the Bopaiah Committee, the petitioner will have to be relegated to appear before the Committee, as in terms of the said order, it is for the Committee to decide the grievance of the petitioner and answer the same. In that light, we are of the considered view that this petition could be disposed, with a direction to the Committee to consider the grievance of the petitioner–revenue site holder and redress the same. 6. The learned Counsel for the BDA submits that several applications are pending before the Committee and there are several applications to be placed before the Committee, they could be of the notification of the year 2018 or 2022. In that light, we deem it appropriate to direct the BDA to consider the grievances of those persons i.e., the revenue - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 site holders, by the Committee, notwithstanding the fact that they are petitioners before the Court or otherwise. It is also necessary for the BDA to notify that the Committee is taking up the applications of the revenue site holders by giving adequate publicity. 7. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there are constructions put up in the property. Therefore, specific direction may be issued to the Committee while assessing the claim of the revenue site holders to look into the fact whether there are constructions put up in the property and pass necessary orders. 8. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (a) The petition stands disposed. (b) The petitioner is relegated to appear before the Committee qua her grievances. (c) The grievance of the petitioner also shall bear consideration at the hands of the Committee like all the other applications that would bear consideration, as observed hereinabove. (d) The Committee while assessing the claim of the revenue site holders shall also look into the fact whether there are constructions put up in the property and pass necessary opinion in accordance with law. (e) Till the Committee decides on the applications of the respective applicants, status quo, qua the property, be maintained by the parties. Ordered accordingly." - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33100-DB WP No. 11692 of 2026 This petition thus deserves to be disposed of on the same lines except with a direction that whatever representation was submitted by the petitioner to the Justice A V Chandrashekar Committee, shall be placed before the Bopaiah Committee. Ordered accordingly and petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE BSV/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24