(d) Learned counsel for the Petitioners relied upon a Co-ordinate Bench decision in B.N. VEDANAND vs BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AIR 1991 KANT 175 , wherein some relief was granted to the litigant on the basis of certain facts as discussed in paragraph 8 thereof, that the compensation was paid to some other persons who were not the khathedars. However, that is not the case here and therefore, the said decision does not come to the aid of the Petitioners. The second ruling i.e., BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs SMT. RAMAKKA, 2002 (4) KCCR 2806 , related to re-conveyance of part of developed land in terms of BDA Resolution dated 17.11.1982 which was passed consensually and the same was approved by the Government under the provisions of 1976 Act. Therefore, the Co-ordinate Bench acting on the doctrine of promissory estoppel, granted relief to the litigant therein. Facts of the case thus being much different, no milk can be drawn from this decision, either. Petitioners reliance on B.K.SRINIVAS vs. BANGALORE
