Located in the heart of the city, the 19th-century Bengaluru Palace’s Grounds were once known for hosting major public events, including bands like The Rolling Stones, Iron Maiden and Metallica for concerts. However, for the last three decades, ownership of the 472.16-acre Palace Grounds has been contentious.
On January 29, Karnataka Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot assented to the Bangalore Palace (Utilization and Regulation of Land) Ordinance, 2025. It marked the latest in the dispute between the Karnataka government and the Wadiyar family, which controlled the erstwhile Kingdom of Mysore and the Palace.
The ordinance also follows a December 2024 order of the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the legal heirs. Here is what to know.
What is the dispute over Palace Grounds?
The dispute dates back to when the state legislature enacted The Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Bill in 1996. Due to its “unique historical and architectural heritage”, the palace was to be “preserved as a monument with the surrounding open space developed to serve public purpose”, according to the Act.
Within that space, the government proposed building a botanical garden, horticultural garden and tree park for the “acutely affected ecological needs of Bangalore City” in light of rapid urbanisation.
The state government took possession of the land and fixed Rs 11 crore as compensation for legal representatives, heirs or other interested parties. Though the legislation was challenged in the Karnataka High Court, it upheld the law. The Wadiyar heirs then filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court.
The Bengaluru Palace. (Express archives)
How did the government respond?
In 1999, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) acquired 13,000 square metres of Palace Grounds land to widen a nearby road in Vasanthnagar and paid compensation as fixed under the 1996 Act. In 2000, the construction of an underpass at Mehkri Circle led to 8,510 square meters of Palace Grounds land being similarly compensated.
The BBMP sought to widen the Ballari Road that leads to Palace Grounds in 2009. It filed an interim application in the SC two years later, seeking permission due to the legal cases. In November 2014, the SC permitted the state government to carry out developmental works but directed it to provide compensation through Transferable Development Rights (TDR) to petitioners.
TDR essentially allows people who have lost their land to civic infrastructure projects to have extra built-up areas elsewhere. The land owner can use the Development Rights Certificate (DRC) issued under the scheme or transfer it to another party. The government approved this in “public interest” in April 2017. A cabinet meeting held in July 2019 allowed the BBMP to issue TDR.
However, as the state deliberated this, the BBMP Commissioner wrote to the state government in February 2021, pointing out that the compensation for the Palace Grounds was defined in the 1996 Act at Rs 11 cr. The letter estimated the compensation to be issued through TDRs at approximately 1,396 cr.
Karnataka filed an interim application in the SC the same month, seeking a review of its 2014 order on TDR. It said the action would burden the state exchequer, whereas, granting compensation as per the 1996 Act would require the state to pay Rs 37.28 lakh only.
What is the dispute on compensation?
A Cabinet note on the issue, accessed by The Indian Express, says that before the 2014 SC decision, the then Advocate General believed in basing compensation on the 1996 Act.
When the Supreme Court was hearing an interim petition, “the Learned Advocates for the Appellants (the Wadiyar heirs) produced a communication written by the then BBMP Commission to the Appellants informing them that as per their request BBMP will be issuing TDRs for the extent of Land required…. Because of this blunder committed by the then BBMP Commissioner, the Supreme Court ordered for issuing the TDRs as compensation,” the note highlighted.
After hearing the state’s petition, the SC said in 2022 that it did not see any reason to modify the 2014 order. In a meeting chaired by the Chief Minister in September 2022, it was decided that roads would be widened within the available land and issuing TDR was against the state’s interests.
“No land will be requested from out of the area covered under the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act, 1996 for the purpose of road widening for the present”, they said. The BBMP also withdrew its proposal for road widening in 2022. A contempt petition was then filed against the government in the SC.
What is the latest ordinance?
The ordinance follows an SC decision from December 2024, when the court set a six-week deadline for the state government to grant TDR for around 15 acres of land sought to widen two roads. Following the order, the BBMP estimated the TDR for the land at the current market value to be Rs 3,011 crore.
The ordinance said the “financial effect of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court will be grave on the exchequer of the state of Karnataka, and upon the urban planning of the city of Bengaluru”. While the 1996 Act empowered the state to acquire portions of Palace Grounds for infrastructure development, the ordinance reserved the state’s right to not acquire more land and withdraw the TDR offer.
Meanwhile, the government has countered the Wadiyar heirs for erecting allegedly illegal structures in the Palace Grounds. Apart from being a venue for high-profile weddings and events, Palace Grounds has multiple halls, a pub, a football academy, a cricket training academy and a business school, etc.
State Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil told reporters recently that the government was also planning to file a contempt petition against the heirs.
Due to its “unique historical and architectural heritage”, the Bengaluru Palace was to be “preserved as a monument with the surrounding open space developed to serve public purpose”, according to a 1996 Act. (Express photo by Jithendra M) 
The Bengaluru Palace. (Express archives)
Share
