Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34901 (KAR)

SMT B LAKSHMI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/34927/2025 · 2026-08-07

R Nataraj

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010750062025 NC: 2026:KHC:41993 WP No. 34927 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 34927 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: SMT. B. LAKSHMI C/O T.N. RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT NO.70, 17TH CROSS, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT BANGALORE-560096 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKHARA R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. JAYASIMHA K.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 2. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD (BELLARY ROAD) BANGALORE-560020 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SITE ALLOTMENT DEPARTMENT, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD (BELLARY ROAD) BANGALORE-560020 …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010750062025 NC: 2026:KHC:41993 WP No. 34927 of 2025 (BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. B.S.SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER, THE LAST OF WHICH BEING MARKED AS ANNEXURE-F DATED 19.09.2025 FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION U/S 38(D) OF BDA ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider her representation dated 19.09.2025 under Section 38D of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (henceforth referred to as 'BDA Act'). 2. The petitioner claims that she purchased a revenue plot bearing No.70, measuring 30' x 40' in Sy.No.1 of Jarakabande Kaval Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. She contends that the aforesaid land was acquired for the purpose of formation of Nandini Layout. She contends that - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010750062025 NC: 2026:KHC:41993 WP No. 34927 of 2025 she has been in possession of the aforesaid property and it is provided with all civic amenities such as electricity and water supply. She therefore, submitted a representation to the respondent - BDA to re-convey or re-allot the said site under Section 38D of the BDA Act. However, the said representation is not considered and therefore, she is before this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider her representation and pass appropriate orders. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions. 4. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that if the petitioner is entitled for the benefit under Section 38D of the BDA Act, the same would be considered in accordance with law. 5. In view of the aforesaid submission, this petition is allowed. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of purchase of the site bearing No.70, measuring 30' x 40' in Sy.No.1 of Jarakabande Kaval Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010750062025 NC: 2026:KHC:41993 WP No. 34927 of 2025 Taluk, under Section 38D of the BDA Act. This shall be complied within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. It is needless to mention that such compliance shall be in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62