Smt Malamma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt Malamma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; the endorsements were not quashed and no allotment was directed. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to apply when respondent No.2 next calls for applications for allotment of sites, such application to be considered by respondent No.2 in accordance with law alongside other applicants.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Endorsements dated 16.02.2017 issued by respondent No.2 (Annexure-A series) are liable to be quashed, and whether respondent No.2 should be directed to allot sites to the petitioners as mentioned in Annexure-E series to the petition.

Court's answer

The sites in respect of which the petitioners are seeking allotment have already been allotted to some of the incumbent allottees as per the Endorsements dated 16.02.2017 issued at Annexure-A series.

Ratio / Principle

As and when respondent No.2 calls for applications for allotment of sites henceforth, it is open to the petitioners to make appropriate application in a manner known to law, and if such an application is made, the same shall be considered by the respondent authority.

Key takeaways

While considering the case of the other applicants, it is open to respondent No.2 to consider the application made by the petitioners herein, in accordance with law.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (E.S. Indiresh, J.) - Twelve petitioners filed WP No. 32201 of 2019 (GM-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the Endorsements dated 16.02.2017 issued by respondent No.2, Karnataka Housing Board (Annexure-A series), and a direction to allot sites as mentioned in Annexure-E series. The Court noted that the sites in respect of which the petitioners sought allotment had already been allotted to some of the incumbent allottees as per the said Endorsements. Declining substantive relief, the Court accepted respondent No.2's submission and recorded that as and when respondent No.2 calls for applications for allotment of sites henceforth, the petitioners may make appropriate application in a manner known to law, and while considering other applicants, respondent No.2 may consider the petitioners' application in accordance with law. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:43895 WP No. 32201 of 2019

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 32201 OF 2019 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. MALAMMA W/O M. MOHAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT DODDAMARANAGOWDANAHALLI VILLAGE & POST, ILAVALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK & DISTRICT.

SRI. M. ANNDAREDDY S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.61, CHINTHALAMADIVALA HUNNOORU ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU-560099.

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI. M. RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE MOHAN AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT DODDAMARANAHALLI ILAVALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK & DISTRICT.

SRI. N. CHANDRAREDDY S/O LATE NANJAREDDY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT NO.136, 6^TH MAIN ROAD, 12^TH CROSS, B.T.M. LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560048.

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:43895 WP No. 32201 of 2019

HC-KAR

SRI LAKSHMANAMURTHY C. M. S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA AED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.48, Y N R BUILDING, YERANDAHALLI JIGANI POST, ANEKAL BENGALURU-560016. 6. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O SWAMYGOWDA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT DODDAMARANAHALLI ILAVALA HOBLI MYSURU TALUK & DISTRICT.

SMT. N. SUVARNA S/O ANANDAREDDY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.E-445, HEBBAGODI GOLLAHALLI, CHANDAPURA POST ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU-560100.

SRI. M. MUNIREDDY C/O P CHANNAREDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.23, B.T.M. LAYOUT, 1^ST PHASE, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, JAIBHEMANAGARA, BENGALURU-560048.

SMT. M. RADHA W/O GOPALAREDDY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.66 NEAR ANNAPURNESHWARI TEMPLE ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU RURAL-560099.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:43895 WP No. 32201 of 2019

HC-KAR

SMT. H.N. PUSHPA W/O MANJUNATHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 46 YARS, R/ATN O.E-445 HEBBAGODI GOLLAHALLI CHANDAPURA CIRCLE ANEKAL BENGALURU DISTRICT-560100.

SMT. NALINA W/O NARAYANAREDDY AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.23/4, 4^TH CROSS, VENKATESHWARA LAYOUT JAIBHEEMANAGARA BENGALURU-560068.

SMT. UMADEVI W/O KUNNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT : DODDAMARAGOWDANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, ILAVALA HOBLI MYSURU TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:43895 WP No. 32201 of 2019

HC-KAR

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, CAUVERY BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU-560009.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENTS DATED 16.02.2017 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANENXURE-A, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, A10 AND A11; AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

1 In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the Endorsements dated 16.02.2017 produced at Annexure-A

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:43895 WP No. 32201 of 2019

HC-KAR

Series, inter alia, sought for a direction to respondent No.2 to allot a site as mentioned in Annexure-E series to the petition.

Heard Sri. Ajit Kalyan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Sri. H.L. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is forthcoming from the petition, that the petitioners have approached the respondent No.2 for allotment of sites. It is also forthcoming that the sites in respect of which petitioners are seeking allotment, have already been allotted to some of the incumbent allottees as per the Endorsements dated 16.02.2017 issued at Annexure-A series.

In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for respondent No.2, that as and when respondent No.2 will call for applications for allotment of sites henceforth, during such time, it is open for the petitioners to make appropriate application in a manner known to law and if such an application is made by the petitioners, same shall be

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:43895 WP No. 32201 of 2019

HC-KAR

considered by the respondent - authority. It is made clear that while considering the case of the other applicants, it is open for respondent No.2 to consider the application made by the petitioners herein, in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4