Sri. Shashi Shekar Naik Vs Bangalore Development Authority

SRI SHASHI SHEKAR NAIK S/O LATE HARIDAS NAIK, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, NO.486/D. 10^TH MAIN ROAD, 8^TH CROSS, RMV EXTENSION, SADASHIVANAGAR, BENGALURU-560094. …PETITIONER (BY SRI VINOD GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU-560 020. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE E- AUCTION NOTIFICATION DATED 14.03.2025 & 15.03.2025 WITH RESPECT TO SITE NO.5 KORAMANGALA LAYOUT 2^ND BLOCK MADIVALA, SL.NO.106, WHICH HAS BEEN PUBLISHED BY RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-K; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.08.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-G.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:52104 WP No. 7615 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

The petitioner is seeking the following reliefs:

¶20

“i) Issue a writ of certiorari or order or direction quashing the e-Auction Notification dated 14.03.2025 & 15.03.2025, with respect to Site No.5, Koramangala Layout 2^nd block Madivala, Sl.No.106, which has been publish by respondent as per Annexure-“K”;

¶21

ii) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ directing the Respondent to consider the representation dated 28.08.2024 vide Annexure-G;

¶22

iii) Issue any other writ or order or direction that deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶24

pursuant to the auction notification dated 16.02.2025, no auction has in fact been conducted.

¶25

The said submission is placed on record. In view thereof, the prayer seeking quashing of e-auction

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:52104 WP No. 7615 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

notification does not survive for consideration at this stage. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies in the event the respondent initiates auction proceedings in respect of site No.5 in future.

¶29

Insofar as the prayer for issuance of mandamus

¶30

is concerned, the grievance of the petitioner is that despite submission of a representation dated 28.08.2024 seeking allotment of site No.5 in his favour, the same has not been considered till date.

¶31

It is the case of the petitioner that an extent of 34 guntas in Sy. No.41/2 of Yediyuru Village was acquired pursuant to the final notification dated 27.10.1964, by the then City Improvement Trust Board, Bengaluru now the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA). In lieu of the said acquisition, sites were allotted in favour of the petitioner’s vendors, in whose favour sale deeds were also executed. The petitioner subsequently purchased one

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:52104 WP No. 7615 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

such site, namely site No. 2293 under a registered sale deed dated 23.07.2018.

¶36

It is further submitted that the petitioner later came to know that site No. 2293 has been earlier put up for auction on 23.08.2003. Consequently, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking allotment of alternate site. The respondent thereafter passed a resolution dated 16.01.2025 in Subject No.674, resolving to retain site No.2293 at HAL 2^nd Stage and to allot an alternate site to the petitioner, namely, site No.5 in Koramangala Layout measuring 269.10 square meters, in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that despite the said resolution, the allotment has not been effected.

¶37

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the allotment of site, would be considered in accordance with law. However, having regard to the resolution passed by the authority in Subject No.674, the same would be considered in accordance with law.

¶38

5 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:52104 WP No. 7615 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

Without expressing any opinion on the merits

¶42

or demerits of the petitioner's claim and in view of the resolution dated 16.01.2025 passed by the respondentauthority, this Court is of the view that the grievance of the petitioner would be adequately redressed, by issuing suitable directions. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

i. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶45

ii. The respondent-BDA is directed to allot site

¶46

No.5 in terms of the resolution dated 16.01.2025 in subject No.674 in accordance with Rule 13 of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1968, subject to availability of the said site and the site being free from encumbrances.

¶47