Bengaluru High Court Examines Illegal Structures Case in Yelahanka
The Karnataka state government presented crucial evidence before the High Court on Thursday regarding the controversial demolition of structures in Waseem Layout and Old Fakir Colony of Yelahanka's Kogilu village. The demolition had taken place in December last year, sparking legal challenges from affected residents.
Government's Submission Based on Digital Evidence
Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty, representing the state government, made a significant submission to the court. He presented Google Earth images as evidence, demonstrating that there were no constructions at the disputed site until 2013. This digital evidence formed the cornerstone of the government's argument against the petitioners' claims of long-term habitation.
The government's detailed timeline revealed:
- As of May 2025, there were 70 structures at the location
- Following this period, an additional 97 illegal temporary structures were constructed
- This brought the total number of structures to 167 before the December demolition
Safety Concerns and Rehabilitation Issues
The government emphasized the extreme danger posed by the location, describing it as an abandoned quarry site that had been designated as a landfill site for the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). Officials stated that the area presented significant risks to human life, justifying the demolition action.
Despite rehabilitation sites being available within a 0.5 to 5 kilometer radius, the court was informed that many evicted residents had returned to the dangerous location. This pattern of return complicated the government's efforts to ensure public safety and proper urban planning.
Judicial Scrutiny and Petitioner's Claims
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Poonacha, engaged in rigorous questioning during the proceedings. The judges specifically queried how petitioners could claim decades of habitation when the Google Earth images clearly showed no constructions at the site in 2013.
In response, the counsel for the petitioners presented temporary allotment letters as evidence of their clients' legitimate claims to the property. The petitioners, led by Zaiba Tabassum and others, argued that the demolition drive conducted on December 20 violated established Supreme Court guidelines.
The petitioners made two key arguments:
- The demolition was conducted without prior notice, contravening Supreme Court directives issued last year
- Affected families had been living at the location for approximately 30 years, establishing long-term residence claims
Legal Proceedings and Next Steps
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the affected residents has been adjourned to next Wednesday for further hearing. The case highlights the complex intersection of urban development, property rights, and judicial oversight in Bengaluru's rapidly evolving landscape.
This legal battle represents a significant test case for how Indian courts balance development imperatives with protection of residents' rights, particularly in urban areas facing pressure from expansion and safety concerns. The outcome could set important precedents for similar cases across Karnataka and potentially other Indian states facing similar urban development challenges.
