SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 6481

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Suraj Govindaraj, J
SRI NEELAM SRIKANTH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP No. 28286 of 2025|WP No. 28287 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Venkatarami Reddy E.
For the Respondents: Chandini Singh, K.B. Monish Kumar

Authorities cannot require the free relinquishment of land for road widening outside a property as a condition precedent for sanctioning a building plan for a single plot, as it violates Article 300A of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:The petitioners sought a writ of certiorari to quash orders requiring the free relinquishment of land for road widening as a condition for building plan sanction. The court analyzed the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 and Article 300A of the Constitution of India, finding that requiring free surrender of land for roads situated outside the property for a single plot plan sanction is without authority of law. The main issue is whether authorities can demand free relinquishment of land for road widening as a prerequisite for sanctioning a building plan. The court reasoned that such a demand violates Article 300A of the Constitution of India, distinguishing this from layout sanctions under Section 72A of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, which does not apply to single plot plan sanctions. Writ petitions are allowed

Table of Content
1. petitioners challenge the requirement of free land relinquishment for road widening as a condition for building plan sanction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. free relinquishment of land for road widening outside the property violates article 300a of the constitution of india. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. distinction between layout sanctions under section 72a and single plot plan sanctions regarding land surrender. (Para 7)
4. quashing of impugned orders and direction to reconsider applications without illegal relinquishment demands. (Para 8)

WRIT PETITION NO. 28286 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

C/W

WRIT PETITION NO. 28287 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

IN WP No. 28286/2025

BETWEEN:

SRI MALEPATI VASU BABU

S/O. MASTHANAIAH NAIDU,

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

R/AT.FLAT NO.203, A BLOCK,

SRADDA PALMERA APARTMENT,

NEAR HORIZAN GURUKUL SCHOOL,

KADUBISANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560103.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENKATARAMI REDDY E.,ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

KARNATAKA

AMBEDKAR BEEDI, VIKAS SOUDHA,

BANGALORE-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER,

BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,

HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R.SQUARE,

BANGALORE-560002.

3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,

TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT,

BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,

VARTHUR, BANGALORE-560087.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. CHANDINI SINGH., HCGP FOR R1;

SRI. K.B. MONISH KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ORDER NO. ADDL.TP/PR/1338/2022-23 DATED 31.01.2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE AT ANNEXURE-A IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

IN WP NO. 28287/2025

BETWEEN:

SRI NEELAM SRIKANTH

S/O VENKATARAMANA NEELAM

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

R/AT NO. 8-5-243 SYNDICATE BANK COLONY

BEHIND J P APARTMENT

OLD BOWENPALLI, TIRUMALAGIRI

HYDERABAD

TELANGALA 5000 11

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. VENKATARAMI REDDY E.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

AMBEDKAR BEEDI, VIKAS SOUDHA,

BANGALORE-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER,

BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,

HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R.SQUARE,

BANGALORE-560002.

3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,

TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT,

BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,

VARTHUR, BANGALORE-560087.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. CHANDINI SINGH., HCGP FOR R1;

SRI. K.B. MONISH KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ORDER NO.ADDL.TP/PR/1338/2022-23, DATED 31-01-2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE AT ANNEXURE-A IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1. The Petitioner in W.P.No.28286/2025 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

a) Issue writ in nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order vide order No. ADDL.TP/PR/1338/2022-23, dated 31.01.2023 passed by the respondent No.3 vide at Annexure-A in the interest of justice and equity.

(b) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order vide Endorsement/shortfall letter dated 20.08.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 vide at Annexure-B in the interest of justice and equity.

(c) Issue any other direction/orders as deems fit by this Hon’ble Court including the cost of the proceedings in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The Petitioner in W.P.No.28287/2025 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

a) Issue writ in n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top