IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 16475 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI H V GAJARAJ, S/O SRI VENKATAPPAREDDY HALANAYAKANAHALLI, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT NO 111, F-2, BOMMASANDRA, INDUSTRIAL AREA, HOSUR ROAD, BENGALURU 560 099.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

2. THE COMMISSIONER, Digitally signed by KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, VARSHA N KAVERI BHAVAN, K G ROAD, RASALKAR Location: HIGH BENGALURU 560 009.

COURT OF KARNATAKA …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI SINGH S, HCGP FOR R-1;

SRI V.N MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 28.01.2022 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-P AND ISSUE A NEW EXCHANGE LETTER IN RESPECT OF HIG II SITE NO.303-B1-ODD TO THE PETITIONER AT THE PREVAILING RATE AS ON THE DATE OF PRIOR ALLOTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court, seeking for the following reliefs:

"a. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the second Respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 28.01.2022 produced vide ANNEXURE- P and issue a new exchange letter in respect of HIG II Site No. 303- B1-ODD to the Petitioner at the prevailing rate as on the date of prior allotment in accordance with law.

a(1). Issue a writ of certiorari, by quashing the allotment cancellation order dated 13.04.2022 bearing No. 60/2021-22 issued by the 2^nd Respondent, produced herewith as Annexure-Q. Alternatively if the 2^nd respondent has already allotted site No. 303-B1- ODD HIG II situated in Suryanagar III phase in favour of III parties, the 2^nd respondent shall be directed to allot 50*80 site in favour of the petitioner at the price which was in force in year 2013 (When the first allotment was made).

b. Grant such other and further relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity."

2. The petitioner initially approached this Court contending that his request for enhancement of the size of the plot allotted to him had not been considered by the respondents. The original allotment made in his favour was in respect of a site measuring 50 × 35 ft., admeasuring 1,750 sq.ft. According to the petitioner, the said extent was insufficient for his requirements and he had, as early as in the year 2013, sought allotment of a larger site. Since no decision was taken on his representation, he sought appropriate relief before this Court. Upon notice being issued, the respondents entered an appearance and filed their objections. During the course of proceedings, it was contended on behalf of the respondents that even the earlier allotment stood cancelled. In view of this development, the petitioner sought an amendment to the writ petition, which was allowed, and additional reliefs were incorporated.

3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was originally allotted a site measuring 1,750 sq.ft. at the rate of ₹950/- per square foot and that the entire consideration in respect thereof was paid by 04.02.2017. The payment was accepted by the respondents without demur. Thus, in so far as the original extent of 1,750 sq.ft. is concerned, the contractual obligations stood fully discharged and the transaction attained finality.

4. Subsequently, on 20.01.2022, the respondents issued an intimation of allotment granting an exchange site admeasuring 4,359 sq.ft. The rate fixed for this allotment was ₹1,550/- per square foot. Within eight days thereof, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 28.01.2022 requesting reconsideration of the rate and contending that he should not be required to pay the enhanced rate in respe