IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.12383 OF 2023 (LA - BDA)

BETWEEN:

SRI P. V. VENKATARAMANA S/O LATE SRI VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 401, ’DEVIN INDIRA PARADISE’, 5^TH CROSS, DEVIN PARADISE LAYOUT, NEXT TO SHOBHA CITY, TANISANDRA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 084.

... PETITIONER (BY SRI BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

2 . THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU – 560 020.

REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3 . THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALRU - 560 020.

... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.RASHMI RAO, HCGP FOR R-1;

SRI AJAY KUMAR M., ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 25.01.2023 BEARING NO. CDA-229 BLA /2018; ANNEXURE-R ISSUED BY THE R-1 AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE R-1 TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER DE-NOTIFYING THE SCHEUDLE PROPERTY FROM THE ACQUISITION PROCEEDINGS AS PER THE RESOLUTION DATED 25.06.2007; ANNEXURE-H AND RECOMMENDED DATED 09.04.2008 AS PER ANNEXURE-J IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

“(i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the Communication dated 25-01-2023 bearing No. CDA-229 BLA/2018, Annexure-R issued by the 1^st respondent and consequently, direct the 1^st respondent to pass appropriate order, de-notifying the schedule property from the acquisition proceedings as per the resolution dated 25-06-2007, Annexure-H and recommended dated 09-04-2008 as per Annexure-J in respect of the Schedule property; and (ii) To grant such other consequential relief that this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case and allow the writ petition with costs in the interest of justice.”

2. Heard Sri Bipin Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Rashmi Rao, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri Ajay Kumar M, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

3.1. The petitioner is the purchaser of schedule land from one Murthaiah to an extent of 10 guntas pursuant to a registered sale deed dated 15-12-1999. At the time of purchase itself, the schedule land stood converted from agriculture to non-agriculture/residential purposes. During the subsistence of ownership of the petitioner, a preliminary notification comes to be issued by the Bengaluru Development Authority (‘BDA’)/2^nd respondent under Section 17(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (‘the Act’ for short) seeking to acquire certain lands at Hosahalli Village and surrounding areas for formation of layout – further extension of Banashankari 6^th Stage. The petitioner is said to have filed his objections to the preliminary notification contending that the schedule land is converted and is in his possession and he has also made several improvements in the land by putting up a compound wall.

3.2. A final notification then comes to be issued on

09-09-2003 which included the land of the petitioner. On

12-01-2004 the respondent passes an award awarding a sum of ₹46,71,731/- for the land measuring 3 acres 24 guntas which included the land of the petitioner. The petitioner then files a writ petition in Writ Petition No.6198 of 2004 challenging the said acquisition. An interim order is passed staying dispossession of the petitioner. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioner that he is continued to be in possession of the land. The said writ petition comes to be tucked with