Bangalore Development Authority Vs M/S. Bindu Ventures

M/S. BINDU VENTURES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM CONSTITUTED UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT AND HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.2, 1^ST MAIN, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, INDUSTRIAL TOWN, RAJAJINAGARA-560 044, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER PARTNER, SRI JAYESH Z SHAH.

¶19

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2026:KHC:8514-DB WA No. 94 of 2024

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI SRIKANTH PATIL K, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1; SRI MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R-2)

¶26

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27.07.2023 IN W.P.NO.14342/2023 (KLR-CON) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE.

¶27

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶31

This intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the order dated 27.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.14342/2023.

¶32

The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

¶33

The land bearing Sy.No.87/2 measuring 1 acre 32 guntas situated at Nagarabhavi Village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, was acquired through the Preliminary

¶34

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:8514-DB WA No. 94 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Notification dated 12.08.1982, along with other lands, followed by the Final Notification dated 16.08.1985 for the formation of Nagarabhavi 2^nd Stage Layout. The owners of the land bearing Sy.No.87/2 had filed W.P.No.45498/2014 before this Court challenging the acquisition proceedings and seeking a declaration that the scheme had got lapsed.

¶37

The learned Single Judge, vide order dated 13.04.2016, had allowed the said W.P.No.45498/2014 and quashed the acquisition proceedings. W.A.No.236/2017 preferred by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) against the order dated 13.04.2016 came to be dismissed on 08.08.2017. The Special Leave Petition (c) Diary No.16034/2022 filed by the BDA challenging the order passed in W.A.No.236/2017 was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the BDA to file a review petition before this Court. It is stated that Review Petition No.357/2023 filed by the BDA is currently pending for consideration before this Court.

¶38

The land owners had sold the schedule property to the petitioner through the registered Sale Deed dated 18.02.2020. The petitioner had applied for conversion of the said land from

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:8514-DB WA No. 94 of 2024

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

agricultural to residential use. The BDA had issued the endorsement dated 08.06.2023 rejecting the request of the petitioner for conversion of the land on the ground that the land comes within the residential use zone as per the Revised Master Plan, 2015 and the said land was included in the modified Layout Plan in Sy.Nos.85 to 88, 131 to 134 of Nagarabhavi, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Nagarabhavi 2^nd Stage, 14^th Block, Bengaluru and therefore, it would not be proper to convert the land in question for residential purpose. Feeling aggrieved by the said endorsement, the petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition.

¶42

The learned Single Judge, in view of the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.45498/2014 as well as the judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.No.236/2017 whereby the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the land in question were quashed on the ground that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed and the land is situated within the residential zone, has set aside the endorsement dated 08.06.2023 issued by the BDA and directed the BDA to pass an order converting the land in

¶43

5 -

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:8514-DB WA No. 94 of 2024

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

question for residential purposes after collecting the necessary charges in accordance with the law.

¶47

As the aforesaid order dated 27.07.2023 passed by the

¶48

learned Single Judge was not being implemented by the BDA, the petitioner had filed the contempt petition being CCC No.1180/2023. During the pendency of the said contempt petition, the counsel for the complainant made the statement that the direction of the learned Single Judge had been complied with and for the said purpose, the affidavit of compliance was also filed by the BDA. As the order passed by the learned Single Judge stood complied with, the contempt petition was closed and disposed of.

¶49

It may also be noted here that Review Petition No.357/2023 filed by the BDA seeking review of the judgment and order dated 08.08.2017 passed in W.A.No.236/2017 also came to be dismissed.

¶50

As the impugned order stands complied with, there is nothing for us to adjudicate in this appeal and therefore, the writ appeal is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

¶51