IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

WRIT PETITION NO. 24324 OF 2024 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. H.S. VIJAYALAKSHMI

W/O. LATE H.N. SURYANARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

2. PRADEEP KUMAR @ PRADEEP H.S.

S/O LATE H.N. SURYANARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT:

HAROHALLI VILLAGE,

HAROHALLI TEMPLE STREET,

HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK,

RAMANAGARA DISTRICT

3. M/S. BRINDAVAN CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.

REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.63

AMRUTHNAGAR MAIN ROAD,

KONANAKUNTE, BENGALURU-62

REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,

Digitally signed

by S. JAGADEESH

MARKONAHALLI

RAMU PRIY A (REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956)

Location: HIGH …PETITIONERS

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. B. RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. BENGALURU METROPOLITAN REGIONAL

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD,

BENGALURU-560052

REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF PUBIC WORKS

M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

3. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001 REP BY ITS SECRETARY

4. KANAKAPURA TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY NO.469/A, SAHAKARI RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT, AGRAHARA NEW COLONY, TUNGANI POST, KANAKAPUR-562117 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 4;

SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (i) QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.03.2023 BEARING NO.BMRDA/ALN/CR 44/2011-2012 ISSUED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT AUTHORITY WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-R (ii) DIRECT THE 4^TH RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 25.06.2024 AND THE 24.07.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-N AND P; (iii) DIRECT THE 4^TH RESPONDENT AUTHORITY BY RELEASING SITES FORMED BY THE PETITIONERS IN THE PROPERTY BEARING SY.NO.60 AND SY.NO.61 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 09 ACRES 28.12 GUNTAS SITUATED HAROHALLI VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK IN TERMS OF THE APPROVED PLAN DATED 15.11.2022 DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå: PÀAiÉÆÃ¥Áæ/J¯ïJN/18/2017-18/1784 WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-L2.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.4 to consider the representations dated 25.06.2024 and 24.07.2024 and to direct respondent No.4 to release sites formed by them in the property bearing Survey Nos.60 and 61 of Harohalli Village, Harohalli Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk as per the approved plan dated 15.11.2022.

2. The sum and substance of the case of the petitioners is that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the owners of the aforesaid land and had sought sanction of a layout plan, which was accorded by respondent No.4 on 15.11.2022. Subsequently, respondent No.4 issued a notification dated 16.03.2023 for formation of an intermediate ring road (IRR). On the basis of the said notification, respondent No.4 refused to release the sites formed by the petitioners on the ground that some of the sites lay within the proposed IRR to be formed. The petitioners submitted representations dated

25.06.2024 and 24.07.2024 requesting the respondents to release the said sites. However, the same were not considered. The petitioners are therefore before this Court seeking the reliefs mentioned above.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the layout plan was sanctioned on 15.11.2022 at which point of time, there was no notification for formation of the IRR. He contends that respondent No.1 issued a notification dated 16.03.2023 proposing formation of the IRR and that respondent No.4 taking advantage of the said notification, now contends that the petitioners are required to relinquish the portion of land required for formation of the IRR. He further contends that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.PNo.24744/2024 considered the effect of the no