IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 21907 OF 2023 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. PRASHANTH NAIK S/O LATE GOPAL NAIK AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/AT. NAGANAVADACHIL HOUSE SAJIPA MUNNOOR VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574231.

2. SRI. UDAYA NAIK S/O. LATE GOPAL NAIK AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/AT NAGANAVADACHIL HOUSE SAJIPA MUNNOOR VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574231.

Digitally …PETITIONERS signed by SUMA (BY SRI. PRASANNA V.R., ADVOCATE)

Location:

HIGH AND:

COURT OF KARNATAKA

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT. OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALORE-575001

3. THE GRAMA PANCHAYATH SAJIPA MUNNOOR VILLAGE AND POST BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574231 REP BY ITS PRESIDENT

4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SAJIPA MUNNOOR VILLAGE AND POST BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574231

5. SRI. B. ASHOK SHENOY S/O GOPALA KRISHNA SHENOY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.20-101/A, BOLANGADI HOUSE PANE MANGALORE VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574231 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2;

SRI. K. SHARANJITH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4;

SRI. S.RAJASHEKHAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.5)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 20.06.2023 IN NO.SAMU/GRAPAM/62/2023-24 ISSUED BY THE 4^TH RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SAJIPA MUNNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners have challenged the notice bearing No.

SaMu/GraPam/62/2023-24 dated 20.06.2023, issued by respondent No.4, whereby thet were directed to remove the obstruction allegedly put up by them on a portion of land claimed to be a public pathway by respondent No.5.

2. (i) The petitioners contend that they, along with their family members, are in possession and enjoyment of 44.04 acres of land in Sy.No.142/2A2C and 0.48 acres in Sy.No.142/13, both situated at Sajipa Munnoor Village, Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District, which were granted by the State Government in favour of their predecessors. It is further contended that the father of respondent No.5 and certain other individuals, who claim to have purchased portions of land adjoining the aforesaid survey numbers, have constructed their residential houses thereon.

(ii) The petitioners claim that there exists a pathway leading to the main road outside the land granted to their predecessors, and therefore, no pathway ever existed within the land granted to them. They contend that this fact is evident from the order of conversion dated 16.02.2013 and the sketch appended thereto. It is further stated that due to landslides and heavy rain, the pathway situated outside the granted land was blocked.

(iii) The respondent No.5 and other residents submitted a representation dated 17.02.2017 alleging that the petitioners and other family members had encroached upon a public road by putting up a fence, and requested that the obstruction be removed. Based on the complaint, respondent No.4 issued a notice dated 25.02.2017 directing the petitioners to remove the obstruction, failing which appropriate action would be initiated. The petitioners submitted their explanation dated 27.02.2017 denying the allegations and stated that the pathway was blocked due to landslides and heavy rain. They further stated that they had got their granted land surveyed and boundary stones fixed within their boundary, and that the allegation of encroachment into the public pathway was false.

(iv) The petitioners also claimed that they lodged a complaint before the Assistant Commissioner, Mangaluru Sub- Division, seeking intervention and resolution of the dispute. It is furthe