Premium

Bengaluru demolition row: Karnataka High Court asks govt to file detailed response to PIL by residents

The Karnataka Government informed the high court that three areas have been demarcated for the temporary relocation of residents rendered homeless by the demolition at Kogilu Layout.

3 min readBengaluruJan 8, 2026 05:19 PM IST

Kogilu Layout demolition Bengaluru, Karnataka High Court PIL rehabilitation, Yelahanka demolition drive,

The Karnataka High Court Wednesday directed the state government to file a detailed response to the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) moved by residents of demolished settlements at Bengaluru’s Kogilu Layout.

The state government informed the division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Poonacha that three areas have been demarcated for the temporary relocation of affected residents, and that basic amenities are being provided.

On December 21, civic agencies began a demolition drive in Kogilu Layout, Yelahanka, leaving more than 150 families homeless. The demolished structures were built on government land designated for solid waste management projects.

The action led to a political row, with local NGOs and activists alleging that some residents had been living in the area for up to 30 years. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan also waded into the controversy and criticised the Karnataka Congress government’s move on social media.

Must Read | Bengaluru demolition drive: 4 agents booked for collecting rent from families who lived on govt land

Both Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and Deputy CM D K Shivakumar responded, stating that the site was an encroached-upon waste disposal area and was not suitable for habitation.

The government also said that eligible local residents will be surveyed for the ‘one lakh housing scheme’ and basic necessities will be provided to them on humanitarian grounds.

The petition, filed by three residents, calls for rehabilitation and alternative accommodation for approximately 3,000 affected people within 5 km of the original site, alongside compensation for the “illegal” demolition. It also asks for writs declaring the action as unconstitutional and asks for action against the officers involved in the demolition, amongst many other remedies.

Story continues below this ad

In the interim, the petition requests the court to ensure food, toilet facilities, shelter and a medical camp for affected residents, along with study materials and other educational assistance for students.

The counsel for the petitioners said, “Now, (the residents) have no place to stay….Rehabilitation centres, three areas which are identified, this was supposed to be done before the demolition. Showcause notice was supposed to be heard. Audi alteram partem (opportunity to be heard) was not followed.”

The court also recorded Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty’s submission that three areas had been demarcated for temporary relocation of residents, with food and other amenities to be provided.

The court directed a response to the petition to be filed, with the matter set to be heard further on January 22.