- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5513 WP No. 10705 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 10705 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI C.K. SATHISH, S/O SHRI C.V. KODANDARAMA SETTY, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT OLD NO.208, NEW NO.18 G-1, 4TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN, NEAR SAGAR VAJARA PARTY HALL, JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011, REPRESENTED BY HIS DULY CONSTITUTED POWER OF ATTORNEY M/S RIGHT PROPERTIES INC, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED PARTNERS HARISH KUMAR KUDLU AND KISHAN RAJ HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT SRIDHAMA, GROUND FLOOR, NO.114, 2ND MAIN, VITTALA NAGARA, OFF: ISRO LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DEEPAK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE BANGALORE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NO.1, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS METROPOLITAN COMMISISONER 2. THE ANEKAL PLANNING AUTHORITY, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5513 WP No. 10705 of 2025 "ANNA ", NO.430, HENNAGARA GATE, HOSURU MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 099 REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY 3. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE K.G.ROAD, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. T.L.KIRAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION AND PLAN FURNISHED TO THEM FOR APPROVAL BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS ANNEXURE-C AND D. 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. Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:- a) "Direct the Respondent No.1 to consider the Representation and Plan furnished to them for approval by issuing a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case as Annexure-c and d. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5513 WP No. 10705 of 2025 b) For the cost of the proceedings." 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the representation which had been submitted by the petitioner for sanction of plan and the subsequent representation submitted by the petitioner on 26.12.2024 have both not been considered by the respondents and it is in that background that the petitioner has sought for the aforesaid relief. 3. Whenever any application for plan sanction or the like were to be submitted to a planning authority, it is required for the planning authority to consider the same and pass necessary orders within the time limit permissible under the said enactment. 4. Though learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that there are reasons for not having considered or for refusing the application, I am of the considered opinion that even if such reasons were to be in existence, the same ought to have been communicated to the petitioner. Neither having been done, I pass the following:- ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. A mandamus is issued. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5513 WP No. 10705 of 2025 ii. Respondent Nos.1 & 2 are directed to consider the application for plan sanction and the representations submitted by the petitioner at Annexures 'C' and 'D' within a period of 60 days and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. iii. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21