- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 1837 OF 2026 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: JNANABHARATHI WARD 129 LAYOUT WELFARE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION FEDERATION ASSOCIATION FEDERATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI JAYARAMAIAH, S/O. MARE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OFFICE AT KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT 'D' GROUP EMPLOYEES RESIDENTIAL WELFARE ASSOCIATION, NO.149, 2ND MAIN, NGEF LAYOUT, MALLATHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560091 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARASIMHARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, (BBMP), NR SQUARE, BANGALORE-560002. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KARNATAKA TANK CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, GROUND FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBALA, BENGALURU-560024. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KENGERI DIVISION, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR ZONE, GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY, (BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE) DIVISIONS OF LAKES, BENGALURU-560 098. Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 4. THE ASST. EXE. ENGINEER, O/O THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE (BBMP), RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR SUB-DIVISION, NEXT HOPCOMS, NEHRU ROAD, BEML 3RD STAGE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 098. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R3 AND R4; SRI. V. RAGHUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER DATED 24-11-2025 BEARING NO.KA.KE. SAM.A.PRA./BEM/TANTRIKA/46/ 2020-21 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. Issue "WRIT OF CERTIORARI" by quashing the impugned Letter dated 24-11-2025 bearing No.KA.KE. SAM.A.PRA./BEM/TANTRIKA/46/2020-21 issued by the 2nd Respondent as per ANNEXURE - "A"; b. Issue "WRIT OF MANDAMUS" directing the 2nd respondent to accommodate permission to perform MAHASHIVARATHRI FESTIVAL' as per earlier permission dt. 06-03-2024 and 18-01- 2025 as per ANNEXURE- "F" bearing No:KA.KE.SAM.A.PRA./BEM/TANTRIKA/46/2020- 21/1140 and ANNEXURE-"G" bearing No.KA.KE. SAM.A.PRA./BEM/TANTRIKA/46/2020-21/1076. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 c. Grant such other reliefs which deem to be a fit under the facts and circumstance of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner–Association states that it has been consistently and uninterruptedly celebrating the Mahashivarathri Festival at the Mallathahalli Tank Bund area for the past nine (09) years, with the knowledge and permission of the concerned authorities. For the current year as well, the petitioner–Association submitted an application seeking permission to conduct the said festival in the customary manner and at the same venue. Notwithstanding such long-standing practice, the said application came to be rejected by respondent No.2 by order dated 24.11.2025, produced at Annexure– A, which is called in question in the present proceedings. 3. The submission of Sri.Narasimharaju., learned counsel for the petitioner is that; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 3.1 Though there was an order passed on IA No.1 of 2023 in Smt.Geetha Misra vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., in WP No.29107 of 2019 & other connected matters preventing any use of the Tank Bund Area for the purpose for recreational or celebrations, the same would not apply to festivities and this aspect having been raised by the BBMP in earlier round of litigation in Jnanabharathi Ward 129 Layout Welfare Development Association Federation & Ors., vs. The Commissioner & Anr., in WP No.6395 of 2024 has been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.03.2024 and this Court had permitted the petitioners to carry out the festivities in the Mallathahalli Lake by imposing certain conditions. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 3.2 His submission is that the very same conditions could be imposed in the present matter which the petitioners would abide by. 4. Sri.V.Raghunath., learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 would submit that; 4.1 In terms of the orders passed in WP No.29107 of 2019 there is an embargo on the use of the Tank Bund Area for any purpose including the purpose of the petitioner to have their festivities in the said area. 4.2 His submission is also that a Contempt Proceedings have been filed in Smt.Geetha Misra vs. Sri Tushar Giri Nath in CCC No.245 of 2024 dated 06.03.2025, the said Contempt Petition came to disposed on a affidavit filed by the Chief Commissioner that even the Amphitheatre will be used as a “Kalyani” and on that basis, he submits that the petitioner cannot be granted permission and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 the rejection made by respondent No.2 in terms of Annexure-A is proper and correct. 5. Heard Sri.Narasimharaju., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Pawan Kumar., learned counsel appearing for respondents No.3 and 4, Sri.V.Raghunath., learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Perused papers. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties at length, and upon a careful and perusal of the orders passed in W.P. No.29107 of 2019, W.P. No.6395 of 2024, as well as the Contempt Proceedings in C.C.C. No.245 of 2024, it becomes abundantly clear that the issue relating to the use of the “Kalyani” for the purpose of celebration of the Mahashivarathri Festival is no longer res integra. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, after taking into consideration the directions issued by the Division Bench, examined the nature of the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 land, the purpose for which the Kalyani was developed, and the manner in which the festival was proposed to be conducted. 7. Upon such consideration, the Co-ordinate Bench came to the categorical conclusion that the Kalyani could indeed be utilised for the limited and regulated purpose of celebrating the Mahashivarathri Festival. Accordingly, the petition was allowed, and a positive direction was issued to the respondents to grant the necessary approval for erection of a temporary structure for installation of the idol of Lord Shiva, subject to the specific condition that only biodegradable materials shall be used and that the activity shall be confined strictly to the area earmarked for the Kalyani. The petitioner was further directed to remove all litter generated during the festivities at its own cost and to ensure that no damage whatsoever is caused to any existing structure or facility. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 8. Apart from the aforesaid conditions, the Co-ordinate Bench consciously struck a balance between environmental concerns and religious observance by reserving liberty in favour of the Karnataka Tank Conservation Development Authority, namely respondent No.2, to impose such additional or ancillary conditions as may be necessary to ensure proper supervision, regulation, and maintenance of the Kalyani during the said occasion. At the same time, the Bench made it explicit that respondent No.2 shall not cause any undue delay in issuing the requisite approval, thereby recognising the time- sensitive nature of the festival. 9. It is not in dispute that these directions were duly implemented by the respondents on the earlier occasion, and the festival was conducted in conformity with the conditions imposed. Importantly, the said orders were not carried in appeal or - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 otherwise challenged by any of the parties and have, therefore, attained finality, binding not only on the parties but also operating as a guiding precedent for subsequent years. 10. Even in the proceedings arising out of alleged non- compliance, namely the Contempt Proceedings in C.C.C. No.245 of 2024, the Contempt Court examined the scope and extent of the permissions earlier granted. The Court clarified that the amphitheatre located within the precincts shall not be utilised as an amphitheatre in its conventional sense, but shall be treated as forming an integral part of the Kalyani. The Contempt Court further made it clear that the use of the amphitheatre for any independent or unrelated purpose stood prohibited. It was also observed that the petitioner would not be entitled to claim any right to use the amphitheatre as such. The said clarification, however, does not detract from the core finding that - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 the use of the Kalyani area for the purpose of Mahashivarathri festivities, subject to conditions, stands permitted. The petitioner has accepted these limitations and has undertaken not to transgress the boundaries so delineated. 11. In the above factual and legal backdrop, and in view of the consistent and unequivocal judicial pronouncements permitting regulated use of the Kalyani for the purpose of celebrating the Mahashivarathri Festival, both by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by the Contempt Court, this Court finds no justification to take a contrary view for the present year. There is neither any material placed on record to demonstrate a change in circumstances nor any alteration in the legal or regulatory framework that would warrant a departure from the earlier decisions. The petitioner, having conducted itself in accordance with the conditions imposed in the past, has acquired a - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 legitimate expectation that similar permission would not be arbitrarily withheld. 12. Denial of such permission, in the face of binding and unchallenged orders operating in the field, would offend the principle of judicial consistency and expose the impugned action to the vice of arbitrariness. Consequently, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner cannot be denied the opportunity to celebrate the festival in the manner and subject to the safeguards already judicially recognised.As such, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. A certiorari is issued, the order dated 24.11.2025 bearing No.KA.KE.SAM.A.PRA./ BEM/TANTRIKA/46/2020-21 passed by respondent No.2 at Annexure-A is quashed. iii. A mandamus is issued directing respondent No.2 to consider the application of the petitioner in terms of the order dated - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6749 WP No. 1837 of 2026 04.03.2024 in WP No.6395 of 2024, by imposing such conditions as were imposed in the said order and any other conditions that the respondent No.2 chooses to impose for the proper maintenance, upkeep and return of the area used for the purpose of carrying out the festivities. iv. Such permission to be issued by end of day 09.02.2026. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 26