High Court dismisses PIL petition on ‘Siddapura Lotus Pond’ land row

Karnataka HC dismisses PIL alleging illegal allotment of land from 'Siddapura Lotus Pond' in Bengaluru. Records show pond exists only on survey no. 8, making contention of petitioner insignificant. BBMP asked to examine laws applicable to buffer zone while considering application for plan sanction. #Karnataka #Bengaluru #PIL #Siddapura #LotusPond #IllegalAllotment #BBMP #BufferZone

The High Court of Karnataka has dismissed a PIL petition, which had alleged that a small piece of land that was part of ‘Siddapura Lotus Pond’ in the city was illegally allotted by the authorities to certain individuals leading to illegal construction on the land on its alienation by the allottees.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice M.G.S. Kamal passed the order while dismissing the petition filed by Whitefield Rising Trust, Bengaluru.

The petitioner-trust had alleged that 0.04 guntas of the total 22 guntas of land in survey number 7 of Siddapura village was illegally allotted to certain land losers in 2012 in lieu of acquisition of their granted land for public utility purposes. And certain individuals, who had purchased the land from the allottees in 2021, were now illegally constructing a building on the land. The area of the pond was being reduced due to illegal allotment and construction, it was claimed in the petition.

However, the bench rejected the trust’s contention on finding from the officials’ records and the village map that the pond exists only on survey number 8 and not on survey number 7. Due to this, the bench said the question of validity of allotment of 0.04 guntas of land itself becomes insignificance.

The primary contention of the petitioner was that ‘Siddapura Lotus Pond’ is also situated on 22 guntas of land on survey number No.7, which they have failed to establish, the bench observed.

Meanwhile, on noticing that the purchasers of the 0.04 guntas of land had not obtained approval from the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, and had given an undertaking to the court that they would not proceed further without sanctioned plan, the bench asked the BBMP to examine laws applicable to buffer zone relating to water bodies while considering their application for plan sanction.