Disposed¶81

Smt. Bagyamma v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2025WP/39047/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout; BDA land acquisition; preliminary notification 21-5-2008 section 17(1) and (3) BDA Act; final notification 18-2-2010 section 19(1) BDA Act; W.A.No.1783/2014; Bangalore Development Authority & Another v. Sri.R. Shankaran & Another; WP No.32186/2010; Kodigehalli village Sy.No.57 Katha No.86; liberty to submit representation; dropping of lands from acquisition; priority allotment of sites; writ petition disposed of; LA-BDA.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the BDA ventilating her grievance, if any; the BDA to consider such representation in accordance with law and communicate the orders passed to the petitioner. ¶81

Smt. Bagyamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶81

Issue for consideration

Whether the preliminary notification dated 21-5-2008 under section 17(1) and (3) of the B.D.A Act and the final notification dated 18-2-2010 under section 19(1) of the B.D.A Act for the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout should be quashed in respect of Sy.No.57 Katha No.86, the schedule property at Kodigehalli village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. +1 more

¶30

Ratio / Principle

Since the acquisition has been upheld by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1783/2014 and connected matters, the petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation ventilating her grievance, if any.

¶79

Key takeaways

If a representation is submitted, the BDA shall consider it in accordance with law, pass necessary orders and communicate the orders so passed to the petitioner.ratio¶80

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (M. Nagaprasanna J.) disposed of W.P. No. 39047 of 2013 filed by Smt. Bagyamma seeking quashing of the preliminary notification dated 21-5-2008 under section 17(1) and (3) of the B.D.A Act and the final notification dated 18-2-2010 under section 19(1) of the B.D.A Act for the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout in respect of Sy.No.57 Katha No.86 at Kodigehalli village. Noting that the Division Bench in W.A.No.1783/2014 and connected matters (Bangalore Development Authority & Another v. Sri.R. Shankaran & Another, decided 22.02.2024) had upheld the acquisition with directions permitting affected owners to seek dropping of their lands or priority allotment of sites, the Single Judge disposed of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation, observing that the BDA would consider it in accordance with law and communicate its orders.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 39047 OF 2013 (LA-BDA)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. BAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO.185, 9TH C MAIN ROAD

¶10

VIJAYANAGARA, BANGALORE-560040

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. H T VASANTH KUMAR .,ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING

¶15

BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶16

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE-560020.

¶18

THE SENIOR LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE-560020.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, H.C.G.P. FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

¶21

SRI. B. VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 & 3)

¶22

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION DT.21.5.2008 U/S 17(1) & (3) OF B.D.A. ACT FOR THE LAYOUT CALLED NADAPRABHU KEMPEGOWDA LAYOUT, ISSUED BY R-2 & 3 IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.57 KATHA NO.86 SO FAR AS AT ANNX-A TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY SITUATED AT KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPUR HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK AND ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers –

¶30

“a) Issue Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction as the case may be and to quash the preliminary Notification vide No.BDA/Commissioner/DC(LA)/ALAO/158/200809 Bangalore dated 21-5-2008 under section 17(1) and (3) of B.D.A Act for the layout called Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout, issued by 2^nd and 3^rd respondent in respect of Sy. No.57 Katha No.86 so far as at Annexure-A to the schedule property situated at Kodigehalli village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk.

¶31

b) to quash gazette final Notification No.UDD 51

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

MNX 2010, Bangalore dated 18-2-2010, under section 19 (1) of B.D.A Act for the layout called Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout approved by the 1st respondent vide so far as Sy. No.57 serial No.307 of Annexure-G of the schedule property situated at Kodigehalli village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North taluk.

¶35

c) pass an order directing the Respondents from taking any further action in pursuance of the said notifications and from passing the award, from dispossessing the petitioner, from demolishing the existing structures or changing the nature in respect of schedule property.”

¶36

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the acquisition for ‘ Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout ’ has been affirmed with certain directions by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1783/2014¹ and connected matters dated 22.02.2024. The directions so issued are as follows -

¶37

“ORDER

¶38

i) The above appeals filed by the BDA are allowed;

¶39

1 Bangalore Development Authority & Another vs. Sri.R. Shankaran & Another

¶40

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

ii) The order dated 11.7.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.32186/2010 and other connected writ petitions is set aside. The orders passed in writ petitions which are decided placing reliance on the order dated 11.7.2014 passed in WP No.32186/2010 and other connected writ petitions are also set aside;

¶44

iii) The preliminary notification bearing No.BDA/ COMMR/DC(LA)/ALAO/158/2008-2009, Bangalore, dated 21.5.2008 and the final notification bearing No. UDD 51 MNX 2010, Bangalore, dated 18.2.2010 issued for acquisition of lands for the formation of the “Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout” are upheld subject to the following conditions:

¶45

a) With regard to the land owners (excluding the site owners):

¶46

i) All the land owners/writ petitioners who are seeking for dropping of their lands from acquisition on the ground that their lands are (1) nursery lands; (2) situated within green belt; (3) totally built up; (4) that the buildings are constructed by religious/charitable educational institutions; (5) that similar adjoining lands have been either left out from acquisition or denotified, are permitted to make an application to the BDA seeking for dropping of their lands from acquisition by producing all such material that

¶47

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

they deem fit/necessary in support of their applications within 3 months from today;

¶51

(ii) The BDA shall consider each of the said application/s keeping in mind the status of the lands as on the date of the preliminary notification and without taking into consideration any developments / improvements / constructions made subsequent to the preliminary notification;

¶52

iii) The BDA shall complete the exercise of considering the applications of the writ petitioners and deciding on the same within an outer limit of six months from today;

¶53

iv) The BDA, upon consideration of the applications shall intimate the writ petitioners about its decision;

¶54

v) If the BDA is of the opinion that the acquisition will have to be proceeded with, the BDA is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law;

¶55

b) Insofar as the site owners who have not made an application as contemplated in para (iii)(a) hereinabove:

¶56

i) They shall register themselves for allotment under the BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 within three months from today by paying the registration fee. However, payment of initial deposit by them is exempted. The

¶57

¶58

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

necessary documents along with the said applications are also to be filed to enable the BDA to verify the same;

¶61

ii) The BDA shall treat the applicants as being entitled for priority allotment and allot each of them a site measuring 30x40 feet in the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout at the prevailing allotment prices subject to the applicants satisfying the dual requirements of allotment under the Rules that they must be the residents of Bengaluru (for 10 years) and should not be owning any residential property in Bengaluru;

¶62

iii) In case the applicants/writ petitioners do not fulfill the requirements for allotment under the Rules, 1984 they may be considered for allotment of 20x30 feet sites as per the Bangalore Development Authority ( Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land ) Rules , 1989;

¶63

c) Insofar as the owners of residential sites who form part of a layout and who have sought for dropping their lands from acquisition in accordance with para (iii)(a) hereinabove, the BDA shall consider the same having regard to the observations made at para 66 hereinabove. If the BDA rejects their applications, the site owners who have first filed applications pursuant to para (iii)(a) hereinabove, shall be entitled to a further

¶64

¶65

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

period of one month after the decision as contemplated therein is intimated to opt to and apply in the manner as contemplated in para (iii)(b) hereinabove.

¶68

iv) Till the aforesaid exercise directed to be undertaken by the BDA and the applications filed by the writ petitioners, either for allotment of sites or for dropping of the lands from acquisition are considered, their possession shall not be disturbed and the existing construction shall not be demolished.

¶69

v) In view of the allowing of the above appeals, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶70

No costs.”

¶71

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶72

the petition be disposed with liberty to submit a representation, as is reserved by the Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment, in the event he would stand covered by the directions so issued.

¶73

Learned counsel for the Bangalore Development Authority (“ BDA ”), Sri. B.Vachan seeks to submit

¶74

¶75

NC: 2025:KHC:19777 WP No. 39047 of 2013

¶76

HC-KAR

¶77

that the petitioner cannot be declared to be beneficiary even on consideration of a

¶78

representation, as she is not the site owner.

¶79

Be that as it may, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition in the light of the acquisition being upheld by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1783/2014 and connected matters reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation pending out his grievance, if any.

¶80

If a representation is submitted, it is needless to observe that the BDA would consider the same in accordance with law and pass necessary orders and communicate the orders so passed to the petitioner.

¶81

With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of .

¶82

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶83

HNM, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49

Cite this judgement

Smt. Bagyamma v. the State of Karnataka, WP/39047/2013 (KA), decided on 10 June 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited2

Bangalore Development Authority & Another vs. Sri.R. Shankaran & AnotherRelied on¶79
WP No.32186/2010Referred¶43

Open Authorities

Statutes6

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227
Bangalore Development Authority Act17(1) and (3) · 17(1) and (3) · 19(1)
BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984
Bangalore Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989Bangalore Development Authority (_ Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land _)_ Rules _, 1989

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Preliminary Notification No.BDA/Commissioner/DC(LA)/ALAO/158/200809 dated 21-5-2008 under section 17(1) and (3) of the B.D.A Act, and Final Notification No.UDD 51 MNX 2010 dated 18-2-2010 under section 19(1) of the B.D.A Act, for the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout, in respect of Sy.No.57 Katha No.86, schedule property at Kodigehalli village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk.Bangalore Development Authority (issued by Respondents Nos.2 and 3; final notification approved by Respondent No.1) · 21-05-2008
Division Bench in W.A.No.1783/2014 and connected matters (order dated 22.02.2024) allowed the BDA's appeals, set aside the Single Judge's order dated 11.7.2014 in WP No.32186/2010 and connected writ petitions, and upheld the preliminary notification dated 21.5.2008 and final notification dated 18.2.2010 for the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout subject to conditions (land owners may apply within 3 months for dropping of their lands; BDA to decide within six months; site owners to register under the BDA (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 for priority allotment; possession not to be disturbed till the exercise is completed).
Order dated 11.7.2014 of the learned Single Judge in WP No.32186/2010 and other connected writ petitions, and orders passed in writ petitions decided placing reliance on it, were set aside by the Division Bench.

View full history

Bench / Coram

M.Nagaprasanna

Parties & counsel

Smt. Bagyamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Bagyamma 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. Putta Narasaiah Vs Smt. Nagarathnamma

M/S Hdfc Bank Ltd., Vs the Registrar, City Civil Court

Sri. R. K. Madhvesh Vs Sri. T. R. Devaraj, Since Deceased by Lrs, Smt Padmaja

Sri Sadashivaiah Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri C Chethan Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Channabasavaiah Alias Channabasappa Vs the Deputy Commissioner