Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.

Petitioners are before this Court praying for a writ of certiorai to quash the resolution dated 7-11-2006 in subject No. 67/2006, letter of allotment dated 16.4.2007 and the sale deeds dated 23.11.2007 and 20.12.2005; and for a mandamus declaring the impugned resolution dated 7-11-2006 and 16.4.2007 and also the sale deed executed in favour of the 5th and 6th respondent are rather void and illegal and in contravention of the Bulk allotment Rules.

Sy. No. 28 of Ramasandra Village measuring 22 acres was originally belonging to one Bhadramma and Nanjamma. According to the petitioners, on the application made by them, there is a conversion order being passed and thus, it was later sub-divided into Sy.No. 28/1A and 28/3. There was also a partition in the family and mutation was also duly effected. also the entries have been carried out in the revenue records. One Shivanna, Nanjapa and Basavaiah who are the sons of Bhadramma and relatives in favour of B.C. Mudduramappa wherein these petitioners in all are said to have got executed a sale deed in their favour each site measuring 30x40 ft and they were said to be in possession and enjoyment. Further, there was a notification issued by the BDA for formation of Vishweswaraya Layout but, prior to that these petitioners were allotted site by one B.C. Mudduramappa in view of the power of attorney held by him and he also had formed in association in the name ot Surabhi Niveshanadarara Singha, which has also filed W.P. Pursuant to the acquisition proceedings issued by the BDA challenging the notification dated 14.12.2001 and 31.10.2002 in various filed by these petitioners, this Court while disposing the petitions, referring to the decision reported in ILR 2005 Kar 608-Junjamma and Others Vs. Bangalore Development Authority and Others had directed them to file representation. However, according to the petitioners, there was a direction issued to consider the case of the petitioners for allotment of sites as per Junjamma’s case, but that has not been considered.

Apart from that, it is contended the respondent Kanakashri House Building Co-operative Society who had no right as such, in whose favour there was bulk allotment made by the BDA to the extent of 10 acres of land under the BDA (Bulk Allotment) Rules, 1995. The same has been challenged in these petitions on the ground that they have not been allotted sites pursuant to the representation gives by them and also the Bulk Allotment made in favour of the respondent - Housing Society, stating that it is in violation of the BDA Rules. Hence, these petitions.

According to the petitioners there was a bulk allotment made in favour of Kanakashri House Building Co-operative Society in violation of S. 65 and also under S. 38(b) read with the Rules for Bulk allotment. There is not land as such available. In fact, the petitioner Society has formed sites and many of the members of the society have already built the house. The allotment made in favour of the respondent Society is in violation of the Rules. Petitioner is seeking to make available the land already deveoped by them by re-notifying the land which comes under the Green Belt. The Society had filed WP 2376/06 and as it was not maintainable, the said writ petitions was withdrawn and as per the endorsement issued by the BDA, no work order is issued nor there is approval of the plan. Accordingly, they have sought for allowing the petitions.

Per Contra, it is the argument of the Counsel representing the BDA that while disposing of Junjamma’ case, this Court has imposed several conditions wherein the applicants were the members of the society. As per the conditions, those persons who lands/sites were acquired, before such acquisitio if they had owned the properties in their names, such persons could makeing allotment of 30x40 ft. sites either in Visweswaraya Layout or any other layout and such of the applicants who have filed applications for allotment of site, their ca