The land bearing Sy.No.40/2B situated at Chikkahalli,

Varana Hobli, Mysore Taluk is the subject matter of this

petition. The petitioner was permitted to divert the subject land

for residential purposes by the competent Authority under

Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.

Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a plan with the

respondent - Planning Authority for sanctioning the formation

of a residential layout in the subject land. The plan was

sanctioned on 21.6.2009 and in terms of the conditions

contained in the sanctioned layout plan, the petitioner executed

a deed , relinquishing the open place, park road etc., in favour

- 3 -

of the respondent No.2. The petitioner's request for release of

the sites formed in the subject land was also approved by the

2nd respondent on 14.2.2011.

Such being the case, the 2nd respondent issued a

notice restraining the petitioner from laying a drain within 25

meters of the Kadakola-Chikkahalli Road, in light of the circular

issued by respondent No.3. The petitioner replied to the

notice. However, the respondent No.2 issued another notice

directing the petitioner to obtain a modified plan which was also

suitably replied by the petitioner.

The

2nd

respondent

passed

an

order

dated

29.1.2013 canceling the sanctioned layout plan and also

enclosed the copy of the proposed modified plan to be

submitted by the petitioner. Taking exception to the same, this

petition is filed.

5.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would make the following submissions:

a)

The impugned order of cancellation of the

sanctioned layout plan was passed in light of the order

dated 11.5.1992 passed by the Government of Karnataka,

by which the Kadakol-Chikkahalli road was upgraded as

District Main Road and there is a restriction imposed in

developing the land within 25 meters from the center of

the District Road. The order dated 11.5.1992 upgrading

the subject road as District Main Road was not notified in

the official gazette as specified under Section 3 of the

- 4 -

Karnataka Highways Act, 1964. Hence, the subject road

cannot be construed as a District Main Road so as to

impose any restriction in developing the subject land

under the provisions of the Karnataka Highways Act,

1964. In support, he places reliance on the decision of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India -

vs- Param Industrial Limited (AIRONLINE 2015 SC 204).

b)

In the absence of any notification issued

under Section 15 of the Act, 1964 for acquiring the

portion of the land falling within the 25 meters from the

center of the district main road and also compensation

having not been paid, the impugned order depriving the

legitimate right of the petitioner in developing the portion

of the subject land is violative Article 300A of the

Constitution of India.

c)

In the absence of any power under the

provisions of Karnataka Town and Planning Act, or

Karnataka

Urban

Development

Authority

Act,

the

impugned order passed canceling or revoking the order

sanctioning the plan passed is one without jurisdiction. In

support, a reliance is placed on the coordinate Bench of

this Court in WP No.34913/2017 (DD 22.10.2020).

6.

The learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2

would make the following submissions:

a)

The subject road was upgraded as district

main road vide order dated 11.5.1992 and the said order

- 5 -

having not been challenged, the petitioner is precluded

from developing the portion of the land falling within 25

meters from the center of the road.

b)

The subject road has been upgraded from

major district road to State highway under the notification

dated 1.9.2020 which is yet to be published in the official

gazette. Hence, on this ground also, the petition is not

maintainable.

c)

The power to sanction includes the power to

add, to amend, vary or rescind the sanction. Hence, the

respondent - Planning Authority in exercise of the power

under Section 32 of the Karnataka Urban Development

Author