IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 31787 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI. K.T. NAGARAJA S/O LATE TEEKAPPA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, NO.57, KONANDURU MAIN ROAD, BEHIND SANTHE MARKET, KONANDURU POST-577 422, AGRAHARA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANIKETHANA K.M., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VARAPRASAD K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, Digitally DEPT. OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND signed by SUMA PANCHAYATH RAJ, Location:

M.S. BUILDINGS, HIGH COURT OF BANGALORE - 560 001.

KARNATAKA

2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SHIVAMOGGA ZILLA PANCHAYATH, OPP: NANJAPPA HOSPITAL, KUVEMPU ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.

3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUKA PANCHAYATH, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, THIRTHAHALLI, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 422.

4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KONANDURU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KONANDURU POST - 577 422, AGRAHARA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K.KENCHEGOWDA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

SRI. A. NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 4)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE/ORDER BEARING NO.TAPANTI/OOPRA.5/2025-26/653 DATED 10.10.2025 ISSUED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has challenged a notice/order bearing No.TaPanTi/OoPra.5/2025-26/653 dated 10.10.2025 issued by respondent No.3. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.3 to consider the objections/reply submitted on 11.09.2025 and to pass appropriate orders.

2. The petitioner claims that the land bearing Sy.No.170/2 of Konanduru Village, Agrahara Hobli, Thirthahalli Taluk, measuring 05 acres was owned and possessed by one Gangayya Gowda who had permitted the villagers of the said village to put up residential houses thereon. The father of the petitioner had also constructed a house during the year 1971- 1972 and the Panchayat effected E-Khatha in his name. The father of the petitioner died on 09.05.1996 leaving behind his wife, the petitioner and his siblings.

3. The mother of the petitioner proposed to utilise a portion of the said house for vending vegetables and therefore submitted an application before the Panchayat for issuance of licence. The Panchayat accordingly granted the licence on 28.12.1998. Based on the said licence, the mother of the petitioner put up a shed and carried on vegetable vending and eked out her livelihood.

4. The mother of the petitioner thereafter submitted an application on 11.06.2001 to enter her name in the property register maintained by the Panchayat. The Panchayat accordingly, entered her name in its records, and she continued to pay property tax, until her death on 26.09.2016. The petitioner claims that he is in possession of the said house and he has also continued vending vegetables started by his mother.

5. The petitioner claimed that when things stood thus, respondent No.3 issued a notice dated 19.08.2025 alleging that the petitioner had encroached a portion of Gramatana land in Sy.No.170/2 belonging to the Panchayat and directed the petitioner to appear before it on 28.08.2025. The petitioner appeared before the Panchayat and submitted his version along with documents.

6. It is claimed that respondent Nos.2 and 4 started interfering with the possession of the petitioner which forced him to file O.S.No.131/2025 for perpetual injunction. Respondent No.3 thereafter issued another notice dated 01.09.2025 directing the petitioner to appear before it on 11.09.2025. The petitioner states that he appeared before respondent No.3 and submitted his reply along with documents in support of his claim that there is no encroachment of Gramatana land. The petitioner claimed that without consid