Smt. Gangamma Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4210 OF 2023 (BDA)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. GANGAMMA D/O LATE BASAVARAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶9

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

¶10

SRI GANESHMAL S/O KAPPORCHAND AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶11

2 -

¶12

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶13

SRI BALAIAH S/O PUTTARANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶14

SRI SRIDHAR MURTHY S/O N THAMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶15

SRI DHANDAPANI S/O PUNYAKOTI AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU,

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶17

3 -

¶18

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶19

SRI PARASMAL S/O SAMERMAL AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶20

SMT M G SHANTHA S/O GOPALRAO AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶21

SRI PREMCHAND S/O SAMPATH RAO

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶23

4 -

¶24

AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶25

SMT JAYAMMA W/O LATE VENKATARAMANAIAH AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶26

STM DHANAKOTIAMMA W/O DORESWAMY AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA,

¶27

5 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶29

R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶30

SRI SATHYANARAYANA S/O GOVARDHANLAL AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶31

SRI NATARAJ S/O PALANISWAMY AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶32

SRI G VENKATESH

¶33

S/O GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/O GIDDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE,

¶34

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶35

YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI C R NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE REVANNASIDDAPPA, R/A NO.608, 68TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560078 NOT CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP

¶36

…PETITIONERS

¶37

(BY SRI. RAMA BHAT K.,ADVOCATE)

¶38

AND:

¶39

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶40

REP BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVT., TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA,

¶41

DR AMBEDKAR BEEDI

¶42

BENGALURU-560001.

¶43

THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

¶44

HEAD OFFICE AT T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU560020

¶45

THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER SIR M VISHWESHWARAIAH LAYOUT FURTHER EXTENSION, BDA HEAD OFFICE T CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU-560020

¶46

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (TASK FORCE)

¶47

7 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶49

BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HEAD OFFICE AT T CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU-560020

¶50

…RESPONDENTS

¶51

(BY SMT.B.SUKANYA BALIGA.,AGA FOR R1)

¶52

(BY SRI.K.KRISHNA ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)

¶53

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BDA AND ITS OFFICERS NOT TO MEDDLE WITH THE POSSESSION AND RIGHTS OF THE PETITIONERS IN RESPECT OF THE HOUSE SITES GRANTED IN THEIR FAVOR COMPRISED IN SY.NO. 38 AND 39 OF GIDDAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI, BENGLAURU NOTRTH TALU, NOW WITHIN THE LIMITS OF BBMP, PENDING DISPOSAL OF SLP NO.15999-16001/2021 AND CONNECTED MATTERS BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND ETC.

¶54

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

¶55

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

¶56

ORAL ORDER

¶57

Petitioners claiming to be the occupants of various

¶58

sites forming part of land in Sy.Nos.38 and 39 of Giddadakonenahalli Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli,

¶59

8 -

¶60

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶61

Bengaluru North Taluk, as shown in paragraph 2 of the petition, claiming to have been the allottees of the said sites on the occasion of "25^th Independence Day celebration" are before this Court seeking following reliefs.

¶62

i) Issue writ in the nature of MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and thereby direct the Respondent BDA and its Officers not to meddle with the possession and rights of the Petitioners in respect of the house sites granted in their favour comprised in Sy. No.38 & 39 of Giddadakonenahalli Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, now within the limits of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, pending disposal of SLP No. 15999-16001/2021 and connected matters before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

¶63

ii) Direct the BDA to restore the compound wall, fencing etc., put up by the Petitioners in their respective house sites, by conducting suitable enquiry through a competent Officer as this Hon'ble Court deems fit.

¶64

iii) And to grant such other and further relief so as to cost of the proceedings as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.

¶65

9 -

¶66

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶67

It appears respondent-BDA had acquired an

¶68

extent of 19 acres of land forming part of the lands in said Survey Nos.38 and 39 for the purpose of formation of Sir.M.Vishveshwaraiah Layout further extension and even allotted sites to various allottees. The grievance of the petitioners is that the challenge to the said acquisition is

¶69

still pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.15999-16001/2021, wherein the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court is stayed, not withstanding

¶70

the same the allottees of the sites made by the respondent - BDA are causing interference into the possession and enjoyment of the properties by the petitioners who are members of the depressed class. That such interference is at the instance of the representatives/officials of the respondent-BDA.

¶71

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶72

since respondent-BDA owes public duty towards the petitioners inasmuch as they are also allottees of sites by

¶73

10 - NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶74

the State under a scheme, merely because their portion of the land was subject matter of acquisition, same would not

¶75

lend any justification for them to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the properties by the petitioners. Hence, he submits that the petitioners are entitled for issuance of mandamus against the respondentBDA and its representatives restraining them from causing interference, damage and demolishing of houses and structures existing on the sites.

¶76

In response, learned counsel appearing for the

¶77

respondent - BDA submits that only an extent of 19 acres 36 guntas of land in Sy.No.38 has been acquired and full

¶78

fledged layout has been formed and sites have been allotted. He further submits that in any event matter involves complex and disputed question of facts which needs to be adjudicated after trial by competent Civil Court and the same cannot be done in a summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, seeks for dismissal of the petition.

¶79

11 -

¶80

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶81

At this juncture, learned counsel for the

¶82

petitioners submits that petitioners have no other alternative remedy inasmuch as the subject matter concerning the validity of the acquisition is pending consideration before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the petitioners herein are not parties to the said proceedings, as such there is no possibility of petitioners seeking any alternate remedy under normal course. Hence, he submits that the petitioners may be granted reliefs as sought for.

¶83

Heard. Perused the records.

¶84

7. Petitioners are claiming to be the beneficiaries

¶85

of allotment of certain sites as shown in paragraph 2 of

¶86

the petition based on certain Hakku Pathra that were purportedly issued by Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, on the occasion of 25^th Independence day Celebration. It is the case of the petitioners that the said sites which were allotted to them formed part of land in Sy.Nos.38 and 39

¶87

of Giddadakonenahalli Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli,

¶88

12 -

¶89

NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶90

Bengaluru North Taluk, part of which has been acquired by the respondent-BDA. The challenge to acquisition is admittedly pending consideration before the Hon'ble Apex Court in the SLP No.11999-16001/2021. The claim of the respondent- BDA on the other hand is that only portion of the land is acquired in which layout is formed, sites have been allotted while the petitioners are claiming relief in respect of entire extent of land in Sy.Nos.38 and 39 which is incorrect.

¶91

Petitioners are seeking relief in the nature of injunction against the respondent-BDA. Since the respondent-BDA is contending that it has acquired 19 acres 36 guntas of land in Sy.Nos.38 and 7 acres 18 guntas of land in Sy.No.39 and there is still unacquired land remaining in the said survey numbers which is stated to be in possession of the petitioners, this Court do not see

¶92

any justifiable ground to interfere into this disputed question of fact under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In that view of the matter, reserving liberty to the

¶93

13 - NC: 2025:KHC:3492 WP No. 4210 of 2023

¶94

petitioners to approach the competent Court of Law and seek adjudication of their right, title and possession and

¶95

avail such other remedy if so advised.

¶96

Petition is disposed of.

¶97

However, considering the peculiar facts of the matter

¶98

as an interim protection enabling the petitioners to approach the competent court of law to avail the remedy as sought for, respondent-BDA is restrained from demolishing or changing the nature of the properties claimed by the petitioners for a period of six months from today.

¶99

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

¶100

RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Smt. Gangamma v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Gangamma 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Ramaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. v. Mala Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Eranna Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Jyoti Vs Chairman

Far East Broadcasting Association of India Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri B P Rajeev Vs State of Karnataka