1. THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus 1. SMT. RATHNAMMA 2. SRI G ARVIND 3. SMT. RADHAMMA

Citation: [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1683 · Decided: 03-01-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 1 S.C.R. 1683 : 2025 INSC 345
1. The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority 
2. Bangalore Development Authority 
v. 
1. Smt. Rathnamma 
2. Sri G Arvind 
3. Smt. Radhamma
(Civil Appeal No. 3764 of 2025) 
03 January 2025
[Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Preliminary notification u/s.17(1) of the Bangalore Development 
Authority Act, 1976 was issued on 20.03.1999 proposing to 
acquire 4 acres and 15 guntas of land from the respondents/
their ancestors-in-interest. The entire transaction with regard to 
acquisition and voluntary surrender of land under the Bangalore 
Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender 
of Land) Rules, 1989 [the original Incentive Rules of 1989] as well 
as possession and also notification under Section 19(1) of the 
Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 and under Section 9 
of the Act stood completed much prior to coming into effect of 
the Amended Incentive Rules i.e., on 27.11.2002. On 10.03.2005, 
an application was filed by the respondents for allotment of the 
sites in terms of the Incentive Rules. Whether the Incentive Rules 
notified on 09.11.1989 which came into effect from 01.04.1989 or 
the Amended Incentive Rules notified on 09.08.2005 which came 
into effect from 27.11.2002, would be applicable in the facts of 
the present case.
Headnotes†
Bangalore Development Authority (Incentive Scheme for 
Voluntary Surrender of Land) Rules, 1989 – Bangalore 
Development Authority Act, 1976 – s.17(1) – Voluntary 
surrender of land under the Incentive Rules – Application 
for allotment of sites in terms of Incentive Rules – Whether 
Incentive Rules of 1989 or Amended Incentive Rules would 
be applicable: 
* Author
1684
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Held: The benefit which the respondents sought to take was 
that since their application was made on 10.03.2005, the 
Amended Incentive Rules had already come into effect and thus 
the consideration should have been made under the Amended 
Incentive Rules which gave benefit of additional entitlement for 
allotment of land to the persons who voluntarily opted to surrender 
their land under the Incentive Rules – The respondents cannot 
claim any benefit which has to be reckoned from the day when 
the entire transaction of voluntary surrender of their land stood 
completed in terms of the acquisition under the relevant statute 
followed by the notification and handover of possession as also the 
compensation amount having been deposited; all of which having 
taken place much prior to 27.11.2002 – In fact, the respondents 
have been able to maintain their claim only for the reason that 
no time limit was fixed for the application under the Incentive 
Rules – However, this cannot be stretched to the limit that the 
respondents could have waited for a better claim to come in future 
to claim benefit in a completed transaction much prior to such 
further benefits being extended – In the present case, it cannot be 
said that just because the respondents had applied for allotment 
of sites on 10.03.2005 their case should be considered in terms 
of the Amended Incentive Rules which itself came into effect 
from 27.11.2002, especially in the background of all formalities 
relating to their acquisition of land having stood completed earlier 
– Further, the respondents never challenged the acquisition 
before any authority or even the amount of compensation which 
clearly indicates that they had chosen to voluntary surrender their 
lands on the basis of what they were aware of, i.e., the original 
Incentive Rules, and thus in that background they are bound by 
their conduct and acceptance and cannot later on agitate due to 
change in the rules at a later date which too came into effect much 
after things stood crystalized – The allotment already made and 
transferred through sale deed executed with regard to two sites 
of 40 ft. x 60 ft. and two sites of 40 ft. x 30 ft. to the respondents 
stands confirmed and they are held not entitled to any further 
allotment. [Paras 13, 15]
List of Acts
Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976; Bangalore Development 
Authority (Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land) 
Rules, 1989.
[2025] 1 S.C.R. 
1685
1. The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority 2. Bangalore Development 
Authority v. 1. Smt. Rathnamma 2. Sri G Arvind 3. Smt. Radhamma
List of Keywords
Incentive Scheme for Voluntary Surrender of Land; Incentive 
Rules; Amend

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.