Sri Sunil K Vs State of Karnataka

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FOR REGULARIZATION DTD 17.10.2023 (ANNX-A) AND ETC.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

The petitioners had earlier approached this Court in

¶31

WP.No.28160/2016, which came to be disposed of by order dated 21.09.2023. By the said order, this Court granted liberty to the petitioners to file an application afresh, in the prescribed format under the relevant provisions of law, seeking regularisation of the extent of land under their occupation, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:54115 WP No. 6726 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

This Court further directed the respondent-Bangalore Development Authority (for short 'BDA') to consider such application within twelve weeks from the date of submission.

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the petitioners submitted the representation to the respondent-authorities on 17.10.2023 (Annexure-A). However, despite the clear and categorical directions issued by this Court, the respondent-BDA has failed to consider the said representation, compelling the petitioners to once again invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

¶36

Learned counsel appearing for the respondentBDA sought to contend that the petitioners had not submitted their representation before the concerned authority and therefore, the question of considering the same did not arise. It is further submitted that if a fresh

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:54115 WP No. 6726 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

representation/application is submitted by the petitioners,

¶41

the same would be considered in accordance with law.

¶42

This Court is unable to accept the aforesaid contention. The manner in which the respondent-BDA has conducted itself reflects a disregard of the order passed by this Court. In WP.No.28160/2016, this Court had issued specific directions in paragraph Nos.11, 12 and 14 as under:

¶43

"11. Nevertheless, since the representation made by the petitioners in furtherance to the earlier orders passed by this Court not having been considered by the BDA even as on this date, it is necessary for further directions to be issued to the respondents BDA to consider the representation of the petitioners. Needless to state that, in order to avoid any confusion, the petitioners are at liberty to file an application afresh in the prescribed format under the relevant provisions of law seeking regularization of the extent of area under their occupation, within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. On receipt of the said application, the respondents-BDA shall consider the application in accordance with law.

¶44

5 -

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:54115 WP No. 6726 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

12. It is necessary to note that along with the petition, the petitioners have enclosed a sketch purportedly prepared by the BDA produced at Annexure 'H' in the petition, which indicates the existence of an house made of A.C.sheets roof. The respondents BDA shall take into consideration the said sketch and not being technical to the nature of the structure existing therein, while considering the application of the petitioners for regularization.

¶48

14. The said consideration of the application shall be completed within twelve weeks from the date of the petitioners making the application."

¶49

A perusal of the record would indicate that the petitioners submitted their application on 17.10.2023 (Annexure-A), and the same was duly acknowledged by the respondent-BDA. No satisfactory explanation has been offered as to why the application/representation has not been considered within the time stipulated by this Court. Such conduct on the part of the respondent-BDA cannot be countenanced and amounts to an abuse or process of law. Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court pass the following:

¶50

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:54115 WP No. 6726 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i) The writ petition is disposed of .

¶54

ii) The respondent-BDA is directed to consider the petitioners’ representation dated 17.10.2023 (Annexure-A) within a period of two(2) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order.

¶55

iii) The respondent-BDA shall pay cost of Rs.20,000/- to the petitioners within a period of two(2) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and file an acknowledgment evidencing such payment.

¶56

iv) In the event of non-compliance with the directions contained in clauses (ii) and (iii) within the stipulated period, the petitioners are at liberty to initiate contempt proceedings against the

¶57

NC: 2025:KHC:54115 WP No. 6726 of 2025

¶58