A public authority is estopped from taking a contrary position regarding factual data (such as road width) upon which it previously relied in official records and prior judicial proceedings, especially when its own previous certifications confirm the criteria for statutory benefits.

WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN WP No.6472/2023 AND PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED:03.01.2024 PASSED IN WP No.6472/2023 (LB-BMP) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND BE FURTHER PLEASED TO DISMISS THE WP No.6472/2023 AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF)

1. This intra Court appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, by the Commissioner, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike¹for short, 'the BBMP' along with Joint Director, who were respondent Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.6472/2023, challenging the order dated 03.01.2024 passed by the Writ Court.

2. Under the impugned order, the Writ Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the respondents to issue a modified building plan/ license with FAR of 2.5 taking into consideration the road width to be greater than 18 meters (in this case 18.4 meters) in a time bound manner.

3. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Writ Court.

4. Facts germane to file this appeal are as under:

The petitioner was before the Writ Court seeking following reliefs:

"a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue Building sanction plan in respect of the lands bearing Sy.Nos.60/3(P) of Shettihalli Village and Sy.Nos.20, 21, 22 and 29 of Myadarahalli Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, totally measuring to an extent of 7 Acres 6½ Guntas and grant 2.5 FAR forthwith;

aa) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned endorsement bearing No.JDTP(N)/PR/1911/2022-23 issued by Respondent No.2 dated 30.03.2023 vide Annexure-J.

b) Issue any other writ, direction or order which deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

5. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land in Sy.Nos.20, 21, 22 and 29 of Myadarahalli Village and Sy.No.60/3 of Shettihalli Village, Bangalore North Taluk, totally measuring 07 Acres 6½ Guntas. For the purpose of developing the said land and putting up multi storied residential apartments approached several authorities and obtained approvals & NOC's and thereafter, applied for sanction of development plan to the Bangalore Development Authority²for short, 'the BDA'.

6. The BDA declined to issue Development Plan on the premise that there are certain encroachments on the existing public road, which made the petitioner to approach the Writ Court in W.P.No.36979/2014. The Writ Court vide order dated 06.10.2015 allowed the petition and directed the BDA to issue development plan. The BBMP was also party to the said proceedings.

7. Subsequent to the development plan issued by the BDA, the petitioner made an application for modification of the plan with the BBMP submitting that he has claimed the lesser FAR than the one for which the petitioner is eligible, in view of the fact that road width is more than 18 meters. As the request was not considered, the petitioner was before the Court in the present Writ Petition seeking Mandamus. However during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the BBMP issued an endorsement declining to accede the application. The petitioner filed an application seeking amendment to insert prayer of Certiorari against the said endorsement and the same was allowed, permitting the petitioner to amend the petition to include the prayer of Certiorari.

8. The case argued before the Writ Court by