##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARNI WRIT APPEAL NO.100261 OF 2026 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MANGALORE VILLAGE PANCHAYATH, TQ: KUKNUR, DIST: KOPPAL-583232.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI.BASAVARAJ MATHAPATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. DHARMAVEER Digitally signed by S/O. SANNABASAPPA MARIBASAPPANAVAR, PRA TIBHA M PATIL AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, Location: HIGH COURT OF R/O. MANGALORE VILLAGE, KARNATAKA DHARWAD TQ: KUKANOOR, DIST: KOPPAL-583231.

BENCH Date: 2026.10.15 14:30:05 +0530

2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORK, M.S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOPPAL DISTRICT, KOPPAL-583232.

4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYAT, KOPPAL DISTRICT, KOPPAL-583231.

5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYAT, KOPPAL DISTRICT, KOPPAL-583231.

6. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUKA PANCHAYAT, KUKANOOR, KUKANOOR TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT-583231.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SANTOSH B.MALLIGAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI.RAKESH M.BILKI, AGA FOR R2 AND R3;

SRI.BHUSHAN B.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.02.2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, IN WP NO.

108599/2025; AND ETC.

THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA AND HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARNI

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

The appellant/Panchayath Development Officer of Mangalore Grama Panchayath, Koppal District, is before the Court calling in question an order of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.108599/2025 disposed on 12.02.2026.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Basavaraj Mathapathi appearing for the appellant, learned counsel Sri. Santosh B. Malligawad appearing for respondent No.1, learned Additional Government Advocate Sri. Rakesh M. Bilki appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the learned counsel Sri. Bhushan B. Kulkarni appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 6.

3. The parties to the appeal would be referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition.

4. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

4.1 The petitioner purchases the subject property bearing No.449/1 in terms of a registered sale deed dated 03.05.1967. The petitioner claims to be in possession of the said property, has constructed a shop and is running his business in the said property, and on 22.10.2023, a notice comes to be issued for removal of the alleged 2 feet encroachment for the purpose of road widening. The petitioner rushes to this Court in Writ Petition No.106523 of 2023, where the learned Single Judge disposes of the Writ Petition by the following order on the following reasons:

“4. On perusal of the content of the impugned notices issued by respondent No.5, this Court has noticed that, the respondent-authority has issued a final notice which is found in two folds; the notice indicates that, the respondent No.5 intends to undertake road widening project. Therefore, in terms of road width, the respondents claim that, from the centre of the road, the existing properties owned by the petitioners contravene the guidelines to maintain minimum distance from the centre of road. There is an encroachment to an extent of 2 feet. Whether the petitioners have encroached or existing properties on account of road widening, requires a new street alignment can be ascertained only by way of survey. It is in this context, this Court while granting protection to all the petitioners issued direction to the 5^th respondent to carryout a survey and measure the property and identify the encroachment if any. This Court also made clear that, before survey is undertaken, individual notices have to be issued to all the concerned owner