The Karnataka High Court has upheld the Bangalore Development Authority’s land acquisition for the Banashankari 6th Stage layout and a connecting road from Kanakapura to Banashankari, while warning officials that violations of the authority’s legal procedures could invite action against them.
A division bench of Justices D.K. Singh and T.M. Nadaf issued the directions while hearing the BDA’s appeal against a March 7, 2024 order passed by a single judge in petitions filed by landowners from Gubbalala village. The bench also sought clarity on whether an earlier decision to withdraw the appeal had been taken on the instructions of the BDA commissioner or on the basis of a resolution of the BDA board.
The court was informed that former BDA commissioner N. Jayaram had directed the withdrawal of the appeal. Although Jayaram submitted an explanation, the bench was not satisfied with it. The court then directed the current BDA commissioner, P. Manivannan, to file an affidavit setting out measures to correct what it described as a systemic lapse in the authority’s handling of court cases.
In response, the commissioner submitted an affidavit on July 28. It stated that the BDA had issued an office memorandum or circular on July 27 to improve the management of litigation. Under the circular, all legal notices, petitions, applications, summonses, court orders, judgments, contempt notices and other legal communications must be sent to the chief legal officer on the same day or the following day.
The circular assigns responsibility for following approved legal steps to zonal commissioners and other officials. It also directs the digitisation of records relating to all judicial cases. A committee headed by the BDA commissioner has been formed to decide whether appeals should be filed. Its members include a lawyer appointed by the commissioner or an additional advocate general, the chief legal officer, a representative of the legal firm, the concerned zonal commissioner and the relevant departmental head.
The division bench warned that any violation of the BDA’s guidelines and circulars would be treated seriously and that the officials responsible could be held accountable and face appropriate action. The directions place the authority’s internal litigation process under closer judicial scrutiny, particularly in land acquisition disputes where legal decisions can affect both project implementation and landowners’ claims.
While examining earlier orders passed by coordinate benches in cases connected with the same project, the court noted that a substantial part of the Banashankari 6th Stage project had already been implemented. On that basis, it set aside the single judge’s order and upheld the acquisition carried out by the BDA.
The landowners had argued that adjoining parcels had been excluded from the acquisition and that they should receive similar relief. They also contended that the BDA could not develop a layout using only small, fragmented parcels of land. The court’s decision, as reported, relied on the project’s substantial implementation and earlier judicial orders upholding its execution. The BDA’s new litigation procedures and digitisation measures are now to guide its handling of future court cases.
