A view of the High Court of Karnataka.
Observing that “the land mafias and land sharks of Bengaluru get every law and rule bent to be favourable towards them”, the High Court of Karnataka has criticised the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for reducing the width of a proposed access road to a landlocked private property to favour a real estate developer, contrary to earlier orders of the Lokayukta, the High Court and the Supreme Court.
A Division Bench comprising Justice D.K. Singh and Justice T.M. Nadaf made these observations while allowing an appeal filed by brothers J.V. Venkatesh and J.V. Srinivas, who own three acres of land in Survey No. 1A, Block 11, of Jakkur Plantation Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk.
18 metres vs. 9.5 metres
The Bench quashed the BDA’s March 5, 2024, resolution to limit the width of the road to 9.5 metres by withdrawing its January 2020 resolution, under which it had prescribed an 18-metre-wide access road while approving the land development plan of M/s Township Promoters (TP), Bengaluru, which owns 25 acres and 16 guntas of land surrounding the appellants’ property.
The BDA, in 2020, had directed TP to leave land for an 18-metre-wide road to provide access to the lands of the appellant brothers.
The Bench noted that even in January 2024, the BDA had informed the Lokayukta that TP had not submitted a revised development plan leaving land for the 18-metre access road as mandated under the 2020 resolution.
The Bench noted that on March 5, 2024, the new BDA Commissioner departed from the 2020 resolution mandating an 18-metre access road and revived the 2018 resolution, which prescribed only a 9.5-metre road.
Questioning this move, the Bench wondered how the Commissioner could alter a decision that had been taken in tune with orders passed by the High Court and the Supreme Court.
“We, therefore, have no hesitation in saying that the respondent [developer] is extremely powerful and even got appointed a Commissioner, BDA, favourable to him. The turnaround by the BDA is an exercise in mala fide, arbitrary, illegal and for considerations other than legal,” the Bench observed.
‘Extremely powerful’
The Bench also said that “the respondent appears to be extremely powerful, for whose help and assistance the entire State machinery comes forward”, while pointing out that this was evident from the fact that the State government issued a gazette notification on July 7, 2020, withdrawing RMP-2031 and directing the BDA to sanction plans as per RMP-2015 to limit the width of the access road to 9.5 metres.
“As the city of Bengaluru has exponentially grown, the demand for housing has also increased manifold and there is unprecedented pressure on natural resources, including land. The land value is skyrocketing. Several land mafias and land sharks are present in the city. These land mafias and land sharks get every law and rule bent to be favourable towards them,” the Bench observed.
Background of case
The case traces back to 2006, when the appellants’ father first approached the court after a developer built a compound wall that made his land inaccessible.
He later filed a complaint before the then Lokayukta, who, in July 2011, asked the BDA to ensure an 18-metre access road as per CDP-1995.
The developer’s plea against the Lokayukta’s report was dismissed by the High Court in 2014 and by the Supreme Court in 2016.
Despite these orders, the BDA, in its 2018 resolution, restricted the width of the access road to 9.5 metres. However, in January 2020, it passed a fresh resolution, admitting that the 2018 resolution was “against the orders of the Lokayukta, High Court and Supreme Court.”
Published – August 01, 2026 10:15 pm IST
