- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2387 WP No. 54538 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 54538 OF 2016 (GM-BWSSB) BETWEEN: SRI. K.T. SRINIVASA S/O LATE K R THIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT NO.371, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, K S TOWN BENGALURU - 560 060. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M B CHANDRACHOODA .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT M S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE BENGALURU WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD, BY ITS CHAIRMAN, 5TH FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN, BWSSB BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KAVERI DIVISION-4, S-2, 19TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 055. Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2387 WP No. 54538 of 2016 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER KAVERI DIVISION, 1ST FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN BWSSB BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 009. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KAVERI (ELECTRIC) DIVISION, SHIMSHA BHAVAN, 1ST FLOOR, 46TH CROSS, 8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 070. 6. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 7. THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU . …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1; V/O DATED 16.01.2023, AGA FOR R6 & R7 SRI. K.B. MONESH KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 & 3 TO EXECUTE THE EXCHANGE DEED AS PER THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE BWSSB DATED 17.04.2012 WHICH WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE LETTER DATED.16.10.2012 VIDE ANNEX-J. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2387 WP No. 54538 of 2016 ORAL ORDER Learned Counsel for the Respondent-BWSSB submitted that the matter has been amicably resolved through the intervention of the petitioner's daughter and that the property being claimed by the petitioner herein has also been alienated as such petitioner has no subsisting interest in the property. That the construction of compound wall made by BWSSB was with the consent and concurrence of the daughter of the petitioner. 2. The above aspects are not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. In that view of the matter, nothing survives for consideration in the matter. Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10