IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

WRIT PETITION NO.37797 OF 2025 (BDA)

BETWEEN:

MR. MITHUN S. SHETTY

AGED 42 YEARS, S/O SUDHAKAR,

R/AT NO.27, PADMA NILAYA,

KUDURAGUNDI TOWN,

KUDURAGUNDI MAIN ROAD,

KOPPA TALUK, KOPPA CHIKKAMAGALURU,

KARNATAKA-577127.

ALSO AT:

NO.11, SHAMBHAVI

3^RD CROSS ROAD,

OPP. TO SK HOSPITAL

TEACHERS LAYOUT, NAGARABAVI,

BANGALORE-560072.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by

MAHALAKSHMI B M (BY SRI SHANTHI BHUSHAN H., ADVOCATE)

Location: HIGH

COURT OF AND:

KARNATAKA

1. THE COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,

BANGALORE-560020. 2. THE SECRETARY

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,

BANGALORE-560020.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT-BDA AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER AND DISPOSE OF THE PETITIONER’S REPRESENTATIONS DATED 14-11-2025, VIDE ANNEXURES-E AND F STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND THE BDA ALLOTMENT OF SITES RULES, 1984, AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

Sri K.Krishna, learned counsel, accepts notice for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents-Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to consider his representations dated 14.11.2025 (Annexures-E and F) strictly in accordance with law and the provisions of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 (‘the Rules, 1984’

for short).

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the BDA.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that on

20.12.2023, he submitted an application for allotment of a flat under the relevant category in terms of the Rules, 1984 along with a payment of Rs.5,50,000/- through cheque No.477697 on 19.12.2023. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter he submitted representation dated 14.11.2025 requesting authorities to allot flat B3-702 in BDA Indraprasta Apartment, Valagerahalli, 5^th Phase. According to the petitioner, despite his earlier application, no decision has been taken on his representation. Apprehending that the flat may be allotted to a third party who applied later in point of time, the petitioner has approached this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that application for allotment relates back to 20.12.2023, the representation so submitted by the petitioner is not yet considered by the respondents-authorities and the petitioner’s apprehension is that flat B3-702 in BDA Indraprasta Apartment, Valagerahalli, 5^th Phase, may be allotted to a third party, thereby rendering the petitioner’s representation infructuous and in the circumstances a direction to consider the representation in accordance with seniority and the Rules, 1984 is warranted.

6. Learned counsel for the BDA submits that the petitioner has given the representations only on 14.11.2025 and the respondents-authorities require reasonable time to consider his representations in accordance with law and no adverse decision has yet been taken against the petitioner.

7. This Court has considered the submission of the learned counsel on both sides and perused the material on record.

8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner submitted an application for allotment on 20.12.2023 and thereafter representation on 14.11.2025 seeking allotment of specific flat. The grievance is confined to non-consideration of his representation and apprehension of allotment in favour of third party.

9. Having regard to the limited nature of relief sought and the fact that the representation are yet to be considered, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met by directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law, the Rules, 1984 and the principle of seniority