Sri Chikkachannappa Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:238 WP No. 28145 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 28145 OF 2023 (LA-BDA)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI CHIKKACHANNAPPA S/O LATE MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/AT GIDDADAKONEHALLI, VISHWANEEDA POST, BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE - 560 091.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. T.A. KARUMBAIAH.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED HEREIN

¶13

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED HEREIN, BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KUMARA PARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU 560 020.

¶16

COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:238 WP No. 28145 of 2023

¶19

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶20

ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. HANUMANTHA RAYA LAGALI AGA FOR R1; SRI. H.T. BASAVARAJA., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R5)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ORDER DECLARING THAT ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY MEASURING 11.08 GUNTAS SITATUED IN GIDADAKONEHALLI VILLAGE, YESHAWANTPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE -560091, BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER, FOR THE FORMATION OF M.VISHWESHWARAIAH LAYOUT VIDE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. BDA.COM.VL.LA. 79/2003-04, DATED 09/04/2003 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 WHICH IS AT ANNEXUER-B AND FINAL NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. NAE.749.BDA.ACQ.2003, BANGALORE DATED 10/09/2003 ISSUED BY R-1 WHICH IS ANNEXURE-D HAS BEEN LAPSED AND ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:238 WP No. 28145 of 2023

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

Petitioner is before this Court seeking following reliefs;

¶30

A) Issue a Writ or order declaring that acquisition of the property measuring 11.08 Guntas Situated in Gidadakonehalli Village, Yeshwantpura Hobli, Bangalore -560 091, belonging to the Petitioner, for the formation of M.Vishweshwaraiah layout vide preliminary notification bearing No.BDA.COM.VL.LA.79/2003-04, dated 09/04/2003 issued by R-1 which is at Annexure-B and final notification bearing No.NAE.749.BDA.ACQ.2003, Bangalore dated 10/09/2003 issued by R-1 which is Annexure-D has been lapsed;

¶31

b) Quash the preliminary notification bearing no. BDA.COM.VL.LA.79/2003-04, dated 09/04/2003 issued by R-1 which is at Annexure-B.

¶32

c) Quash the final notification bearing no. NAE.749.BDA.ACQ.2003, Bangalore dated 10/09/2003 issued by R-1 which is Annexure-D and any other consequent acquisition proceedings pursuant to the said notification as well;

¶33

Alternatively,

¶34

A. Issue a Writ or order declaring that the acquisition of property measuring 30'x 60' of the 11 Guntas of property situated in Giddadakonehalli Village, Yeshwanthoura Hobli, Bangalore - 560 091, belonging to the petitioner, for the formation of M. Vishweshwaraiah layout vide preliminary notification Bearing No.BDA.COM.VL.LA.79/200304, dated 09/04/2003 issued by R-1 which is at Annexure-B and final notification Bearing No. NAE.749.BDA.ACQ.2003, Bangalore dated 10/09/2003 issued by R-1 which is Annexure-D is quashed.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:238 WP No. 28145 of 2023

¶37

B. Pass any such order that this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the fact and circumstances of the case, in the furtherance of interests of justice."

¶38

Having argued the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner referrers to the order dated 30.03.2021 passed in W.P.No.33117/2017 produced at Annexure-L and submits that one Siddappa (petitioner therein) is none other than brother of the petitioner in this petition had approached this Court seeking similar relief as that of the one made in the present writ petition in respect of the very same property contenting that he owned a residential house within the said 1 acre 9 guntas of land. That this Court taking into consideration of the resolution that were passed by the BDA in respect of the cases situated similar to that of the one at hand, whereby, the BDA had resolved to drop the acquisition in respect of the small portion of the Grama Tana limits, had allowed the writ petition.

¶39

Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no difference of any nature of whatsoever with regard to the case of the petitioner in the said writ petition with that of the

¶40

5 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:238 WP No. 28145 of 2023

¶42

present petitioner, moreso, they being the brothers and joint owners of the very same property.

¶43

Learned counsel for the respondent -BDA does not dispute the above and the order dated 30.03.2021. He also confirmed that no appeal has been filed in respect of the said order.

¶44

It is necessary to extract para 3 of the order passed in W.P.No.33117/2017.

¶45

"3. In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to various documents produced by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the layout plan at Annexure-E as well as the sketch at Annexure-F in order to contend that out of the total extent of 1 acre 9 guntas of land which was proposed to be acquired in Sy.No.8/1, the BDA has not taken possession of two guntas of land, wherein the petitioner has put up a residential house. It is submitted that the said two guntas of land out of the total extend of 1 acres 9 guntas is situated within Grama Thana limits and the same deserves to be dropped from the acquisition proceedings. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to Annexures-J and K, wherein the BDA under identical circumstances, has resolved to drop the acquisition proceedings in respect of small portions of grama thana lands. It is therefore contended that by applying the doctrine of parity, acquisition proceedings in respect of two guntas of land in Sy.No.8/1, which is situated within Grama Thana limits, where the petitioner has put up residential house as can be seen from the photographs at Annexure-C series, deserves to be quashed".

¶46

6 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:238 WP No. 28145 of 2023

¶48

Since the petitioner is placed under similar situation

¶49

as that of the petitioner in W.P.No.33117/2017 being his brother, this Court is of the considered view that on the principles of parity, petitioner shall also be entitled for the similar relief.

¶50

In that view of the matter, following;

¶51

ORDER

¶52

(1) Petition is allowed in part.

¶53

(2) Petition as regard to the prayers a, b and c is concerned, is dismissed.

¶54

(3) Alternate relief as sought for, is granted. Acquisition

¶55

to the extent of 30 ft. X 60 ft. out of 11 guntas of land in Sy.No.8/1 situated in Gidadakonehalli village, Yeshwanthpur Hobli, Bangalore belonging to the petitioner is quashed.

¶56

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶57

RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41

Sri Chikkachannappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Chikkachannappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Govindaraju Vs Deputy Commissioner

Sri H Ravi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri N Gangadhar Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs T G Shanthamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Muniyappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M. Prabhakar Vs the Commissioner